The Scandinavian Unemployment Relief Program [Reprint 2016 ed.] 9781512805611

Citation preview

THE SCANDINAVIAN RELIEF

UNEMPLOYMENT PROGRAM

"Our problem is to work out a social and economic organization which shall be as efficient as possible without offending our notions of a satisfactory way of life." JOHN

MAYNARD

KEYNES

T H E SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF PROGRAM

By C. J. RATZLAFF, PH.D. Professor of Economics Lafayette College

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS Philadelphia 1934 LONDON: HUMPHREY OXFORD UNIVERSITY

MILFORD PRESS

Copyright 1934 UNIVERSITY

OF

PENNSYLVANIA

PRESS

Manufactured in the United States of America

To L. N. R.

PREFACE

T

H E degree to which the various programs of unemployment relief have been subjected to criticism presents the economist with the problem of throwing such light as he can upon a great social question with which the countries of the world are trying to cope. This criticism prevails not only with regard to the kinds of relief but also the methods of administration which have been employed by the different nations. The divergent views held were again very clearly brought out in Professor J. M. Keynes* recent articles advocating the use of public works1 and the emphatic reply by the President of the British Board of Trade, Mr. Walter Runciman, that public works "are the most unremunerative of all efforts to reduce unemployment. . . . The schemes were expensive and we shall not reopen them no matter what other nations do." It is unnecessary to point out that concerning other kinds of relief equally opposed views are held. The purpose of this monograph is to make a case study of unemployment relief. The aim is threefold. In the first place, a concise discussion is given of the social machinery

1 "The Means to Prosperity," The London Times, March 13-16, 1933. Keynes reasons that in Great Britain the expenditure on public works of £150 would result, directly and indirectly, in putting an unemployed man to work for a year, and that a half to two-thirds of this expenditure would be recovered by the government in the saving on unemployment benefits and the increased receipts from taxation.

vii

viii

PREFACE

which has been set up by the Scandinavian countries in their attempt to cope with the problem of mass unemployment. Secondly, an examination is made of the evaluation of those social groups which are directly concerned in the outcome of the program. Thirdly, conclusions to which the Scandinavian program points are drawn relative to the theory and practice of unemployment relief. In this field, as in some other phases of social legislation, the experience of the Scandinavian countries has possibly been more fruitful for the economist than similar programs have been in the larger nations. This was true of the Bratt liquor control plan of Sweden and the adult education movement in Denmark, which have had in the past a widespread influence in other countries. And today the same seems to be true of the Swedish experiment with "managed currency." T o the student of economic phenomena it is unnecessary to point out the high degree of interdependence which exists in our social economic structure. Nor is it necessary to emphasize the far-reaching repercussions of a governmental program of regulation or relief—although this is frequently ignored even by many economists or "economic advisers." In view of this it might well be contended that a study of unemployment and its relief necessitates at the same time a consideration of the labor movement as a whole in all of its ramifications. Nevertheless it seemed desirable to confine the scope of this book to the unemployment relief program in view of the urgency and predominating importance of the unemployment problem. Although my research, first-hand investigations,

PREFACE

ix

and conferences in the Scandinavian countries extended into practically every phase of the labor movement, it is not my intention to consider at this time the historical background, the development of the problem, or its interrelations with those social economic institutions, forces, and movements with which the various aspects of unemployment and its relief are so intimately connected. For the reader with a special interest in the field of the labor movement and labor problems and who desires to go beyond the bounds of this publication, I have given in Appendix D a carefully selected bibliography of the sources of material which would be most directly useful. The first part of my examination of the Scandinavian program of unemployment relief will be concerned with the organization and administration of the relief measures. In the second part of the study an appraisal of these measures will be made. I am indebted to the Bureau of International Research of Harvard University for the opportunity to gather the material on which this study is based. For the stimulation and guidance which I have received in this and other investigations I am deeply grateful to Professor F. W. Taussig and Professor T. N. Carver of Harvard University and to Professor H . A. Millis of the University of Chicago. I also wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to Dr. E. G. Huss, Director-General of the Social Board of Sweden and Chairman of the National Unemployment Commission} to Mr. Sigfrid Hansson, Editor of Fackjoremngsrorelsen, official organ of the Swedish Confederation of Trade Unions, and member of the Swedish

PREFACE

X

Parliament j to D r . 0 . Borge and M r . A. Dahlberg of the labor archives at Stockholm} to Professor Gunnar Myrdahl of the University of Stockholm} to M r . F . Soderbâck, Director of the Swedish Employers' Federation} to D r . B. Brilioth, Director of the Swedish-International Press Agency} and to others, in private and governmental offices, for their generous assistance and advice to me while pursuing my research in Stockholm. T h e government officials, university men, labor leaders, and employers' representatives who have so kindly given me aid during my period of research in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are in no way responsible for the interpretation of the materials I have used nor the conclusions which I draw. May

1Ç34

C. J. RATZLAFF

CONTENTS CHAPTER

PAGE

I

I. Introduction The Scandinavian countries as a case study in unemployment relief: degree of mass unemployment; extent of seasonal variation in employment. PART I U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E L I E F IN T H E SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES: ADMINISTRATION

II. Cash, or Direct, Relief 1. The function, amount, and relative importance of direct relief: in Sweden; in Norway; in Denmark. 2. The administration of direct relief: public labor exchanges the focal point; relation of public works to direct relief. III. Unemployment Insurance i. The Danish system: the subsidy by the State; the "ordinary" unemployment funds the "first line of defense." The Central Unemployment Fund: the "second line of defense"; contributions; benefits. The Emergency Fund: the "third line of defense."

15

15

25 29

29

zii

CONTENTS

CHAPTER

PAGE

2. T h e unemployment insurance work of the Swedish trade unions: benefits paid; elements of weakness.

IV. Public Works

41

1. T h e development and organization in Sweden. 2. T h e selection of projects: guiding principles; types of projects; financing. 3. Administration of public projects: the National Unemployment Commission and the local authorities. 4. Wage policy: relation of wages paid in public work to the private labor market; during periods of industrial disputes. 5. Significance of public works in Sweden. 6. T h e public works program in N o r w a y and Denmark: relative importance; " v o l u n tary labor service."

PART UNEMPLOYMENT SCANDINAVIAN

37

41 44

48

5° 55

57

II RELIEF

COUNTRIES:

IN

THE

APPRAISAL

V . The Workers' Viewpoint 1. T h e Swedish workers' criticism of the public works program: the National Unemployment Commission; the wage policy; selection of projects; organization and administration of projects; public control of industrial "rationalization."

67

68

CONTENTS CHAPTER

ziii PAGE

1. The Scandinavian workers' view of unemployment insurance. V I . T h e Employers' Attitude 1. Union wage policy and public works: criticism of union policy and of the Unemployment Commission; competition of public and private labor markets. 2. Influence of public works on workers: charge of demoralization cannot be substantiated nor refuted. 3. Unemployment insurance: basic questions cannot be answered; inadequacy of unemployment insurance. V I I . T h e Governments' Position

83 86

87

91

94 98

1. The public works program in Sweden: the primary factor in relief; low cost of administration; principles and policy of Unemployment Commission upheld but public works should be extended; special public works at normal wage rates now planned; public projects a measure of monetary stabilization; "advance planning" not effective. 98 1. Public works in Norway and Denmark. 109 3. Unemployment insurance: consideration by the Swedish government; the position of Norway and Denmark. Ill V I I I . Conclusions 1. The administrative aspects of unemployment relief: (1) possibilities of the relief program as a whole is limited; (2) useful-

117

CONTENTS

xiv CHAPTER

PAGE

ness of each measure of relief is l i m i t e d — difficulty o f defining " t h e u n e m p l o y e d , " diversity o f occupation and age, inherent inflexibility o f relief measures; (3) need of centralization in administration and decentralization in supervision; (4) effective administration of public works more difficult than generally realized; (5) unemployment insurance can play b u t a very restricted rôle in relief program.

118

1. T h e social implications of the unemployment relief program: (1) relief an accepted governmental function in Scandinavian countries; (2) unemployment problem a set of interrelated social questions; (3) in unemployment relief economic theory and economic practice are closely connected. 13 5 APPENDICES

A : The Structure of the Governmental Unemployment Relief Organization in Sweden 143 i . T h e M i n i s t r y o f Social Affairs 1. T h e National U n e m p l o y m e n t Commission 3. T h e Public L a b o r Exchanges

B : Scandinavian "Collectivism"

143 145 147

154

i . General

154

1 . Collective Agreements

157

C : Statistical Tables 1. T r a d e Union Membership and Percentage of U n e m p l o y m e n t in N o r w a y , 1906-1933

159 160

CONTENTS CHAPTER

xv PAGE

2. Unemployment in Swedish Trade Unions, 1911-1933 3. Employment in Danish Trade Unions, 1920-1933 4. Total Unemployment in Great Britain, 1920-1933 5. Index of Employment in the United States, 1914-1934 6. Public Labor Exchange System in Sweden, 1911-1934 7. Unemployment Relief Statistics in Sweden, 1922-1934 8. Distribution of Total Costs of the National Public Relief Works in Sweden, 1918-1931 (per day) 9. Collective Agreements in Sweden 10. Duration of Collective Agreements in Sweden, 1908-1924 (in per cent of total number of agreements)

161 165 168 169 170 178 187 188 189

D : Sources of Material on Subjects Related to the Scandinavian Unemployment Relief Program 190 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

191 194 194 195

Index

203

The Political Labor Movement The Trade Union Movement The Workers' Educational Movement The Cooperative Movement The Social Board and The State Unemployment Commission 6. The Development of Industry

196 198

TABLES PAGE

I. Percentage of Trade Union Members Unemployed (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Great Britain, and Germany—1927-1934)

3

II. Percentage of Unemployment in Denmark by Months, 1927-1934

7

III. Statistics on Unemployment Assistance Granted in Sweden, 1930-1932

19

IV. Unemployment Relief Expenditure in Norway, 1919-1923

20

V. Financing of Unemployment Benefit System— Denmark, 1922-1931 23 VI. Public Subsidies of Denmark to Unemployment Insurance Funds

32

VII. Wages on Public Works in Sweden Relative to the Open Labor Market

52

VIII. Unemployed Workers Assigned to Public Works in Sweden, 1921-1924 (In per cent of the total number reported to the State Unemployment Commission)

56

IX. Inventory by the Swedish Government of Available Work for Public Projects in Relief of Unemployment

77

X. Duration of Employment on Swedish Unemployment Relief Projects

92

xviii

TABLES PAGE

X I . Governmental Expenditures of Sweden in Meeting the Unemployment Situation, 1914-1924 100 X I I . Survey of the First Ten Years of Work of the Goteborg Public Labor Exchange 149 X I I I . The Distribution of the Costs of Operating the Public Labor Exchange System of Sweden (for 1921) 152 X I V . Trade Union Membership and Percentage of Unemployment in Norway, 1906-1933 160 X V . Unemployment in Swedish Trade Unions, 1911— 1933

161

X V I . Employment in Danish Trade Unions, 1920-1933 165 X V I I . Total Unemployment in Great Britain 1920-1933 168 X V I I I . Index of Employment in the United States, 1 9 1 4 1934 169 X I X . Public Labor Exchange System in Sweden, 1 9 1 1 1934 170 X X . Unemployment Relief Statistics in Sweden, 1 9 2 2 1934 178 X X I . Distribution of Total Cost of the National Public Relief Work in Sweden, 1 9 1 8 - 1 9 3 1 (per day) 186 X X I I . Collective Agreements in Sweden

1&8

X X I I I . Duration of Collective Agreements in Sweden, 1908-1924 (in per cent of total number of agreements) 189

CHARTS PAGE

I. Trend of Employment in Sweden, the United States, and Great Britain, 1920-1933

5

II. Extent of Unemployment in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, 1920-1933

8

III. The Number of Unemployed Workers, Kinds of Relief Given, and the Annual Expenditure in Sweden, 1920-1933

17

IV. Workers on Government Relief Projects in Sweden, 1922-1933 46 V. Distribution of Total Cost of the National Public Relief Work in Sweden, 1918-1931 (per day) 102 VI. Fluctuations of Employment in Private Industry and on Public Relief Projects in Sweden, 1922-1934 105 VII. Number of Unemployed Workers in Sweden Given Relief, 1920-1933 119 VIII. The Percentage of the Total Number of Unemployed Workers in Sweden, Given Cash, Given Work Relief, and Given Cash or Work, 1922-1934 123

I INTRODUCTION The Scandinavian Countries as a Case Study in Unemployment Relief

T

H E experience of the Scandinavian countries with unemployment relief is particularly enlightening. In the first place, a highly sensitive social democracy in those countries1 has for a longer continuous period of time recognized unemployment as a national, governmental problem than is true elsewhere. Apropos of this it is significant to point out that the Swedish Government appointed the Royal Unemployment Commission in 1914, and this body has functioned uninterruptedly since that date. Secondly, the programs of the unemployment relief carried on by Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have been sufficiently different to provide the economist with an approach to the desirable situation of "other things being equal" and to allow for the operation of the variable in the equation— the unemployment relief program—to be examined under economic and social conditions which otherwise are highly similar. Thirdly, the size of each of the countries is not so large as to make examination of social action and re-

Sweden was the first government of Europe to go into the hands of the Social Democrats. 1

1

2

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

action nearly impossible. 2 A n d to these three factors in an examination of the Scandinavian unemployment experience must be added the remarkable completeness of governmental statistical records and parliamentary reports. 8 On the other hand, it might be held that the Scandinavian experience does not provide a suitable case for the study of unemployment relief measures, inasmuch as the size of the geographical area concerned would preclude an unemployment problem comparable in nature to that faced by an industrialized country such as Germany or Great Britain. M o r e specifically, mass unemployment both of a seasonal and a cyclical character has long been recognized as a function of large-scale production and specialization common to the leading industrial nations. 4 It would seem that two factors in the economic situation of Scandinavia would have given the flexibility to the social * Which, of course, very much complicates the evaluation of any prog r a m in a territory as large as the United States and even in Germany with its great Bocial and economic differences as between northern and southern and between eastern and western sections of that nation—to say nothing of the fact that a social program in a large nation (especially our own) is usually inextricably interwoven with political maneuvering of one sort or another to a greater degree than in small unitary governments such as are the Scandinavian countries. * Not only is there meticulous accuracy evidenced in the preparation of statistical records but a refreshingly critical spirit is found in the official documents which transcends party affiliations and approaches the academic. One might also add that for the student of trade unionism one finds in the Scandinavian countries (and especially in Sweden) very nearly complete organization of workers on the one side, and employers on the other, with regular and frequent publications from both. ' T h i s , of course, was first emphasized by K a r l M a r x in his thesis of the "industrial reserve a r m y . "

INTRODUCTION

3

TABLE I PERCENTAGE OF TRADE U N I O N MEMBERS

19*7 1928 1929 1930 «931 1932 J 933 January February March April May June July August September October November December «934 January February

Great Britain

Germany

«5 4 16.6 22.3 308

12.0 10.6 10.7 12.2 17.2 22.8

7-4 8.2 8.2 11.8

8-7 8.6 13.2 22.2

16.7 17.6

34 3 43-8

39-3 40.0 38 J 3S-7 3° 9 27.2 26.0 28.4

29.1 27.8 29.0 2J.9 22.3 21.4 19.8 20.0

18.9 18.7 18.0 17.2 16.6 ij.8

46.2

30.9 3i-3 33 4 39 4

19 7 20.6 22.7 27.6

• •

• •

Denmark

Norway

Sweden

22.5 18.J 18. !

25-4 19.2

>3-7 >7-9 3«-7 43-5 42.8 35-4 28.6 25 4 21.9 21.7 21.4 20.9 23.2 2J.7

37 S 34 4 •

UNEMPLOYED'

15-S i i-3 ii-3 IS 3 IS 3

47-4 $2.7 46.3 44 7

IJ.I

26.3 22.3 20.9 20.3 24.7

IS 9 •

20.4 18.2

Source: International Labour Office, International Labour Review, Vol. X X I X , No. 3, March, 1934, pp. 415-420. *Not yet reported. ' T h e percentages are for members wholly unemployed. German returns (not included in the table) also give partial employment. With regard to Germany it is interesting to note that the International Labour Office reports for June and July of 1933 that "no figures exist" and from that time on the percentage unemployed is reported as "new series: returns from the German National Labour Front." In view of the marked and sudden decrease in unemployment as reported by the "German National Labour Front" one wonders whether this decrease has actually oc-

4

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

structure which would preclude the problem of serious unemployment. These are that the countries are very largely agricultural and that industrial plants are on the whole much smaller than they are in a large industrial state. It is a notable fact that official records given in the above table prove that such is not the case and that, on the contrary, unemployment of an intensity comparable to that of Great Britain and Germany has prevailed curred or whether the reports are intended to serve as propaganda favorable to the Hitler regime. The Labour Office warns against the use of these statistics for international comparisons except as approximations. The thirty countries which now publish regular figures of unemployment use, of course, unlike methods of compilation and also differ in their definition of unemployment. The Office does not explain, however, discrepancies which are found within the statistics for any one country. The percentages as reported above in the International Labour Review for Sweden for 1933 do not agree with those found in the Sociala Meddelanden of Sweden. Cf., e.g., reports of the Industrial and Labour Information and the Refort of the Director. International Labour Conference, 17th. Session, Geneva 1933, pp. 27-30. Tables X I V - X V I , Appendix C, infra, give the unemployment situation by months in Sweden from 1 9 1 1 , in Denmark from 1920, and in Norway from 1 9 1 4 to 1934. As a matter of convenience, the following abbreviations will be used hereafter: International Labour Office—I.L.O.j International Labour Review—I.L.R.; Industrial and Labour Information—I.L.I. Attention is also called to the fact that the I.L.R. and I.L.I, are official publications of the I.L.O. and that this will not be indicated in further references which will be made to these publications. Another point to which I should like to call the reader's notice at this time is this—for current press reports I have relied very largely upon the I.L.I. From an examination which I made both in Geneva and in Stockholm I have found that the reports of the I.L.I, are exceptionally well-prepared, unbiased summaries. This publication of the Labour Office is a veritable mine of information. When quoting material from the I.L.I, the practice which I shall follow will be to give the original source and date followed directly by the I.L.I, reference in parenthesis.

INTRODUCTION

5

in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden for the last several years. CHART

I

T R E N D OF E M P L O Y M E N T IN SWEDEN, T H E U N I T E D STATES, AND G R E A T

BRITAIN, 1 9 1 0 - 1 9 3 3 *

* For the sources from which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C, Tables X V , X V I I , and XVIII, pp. 161-164, 168, and 169 respectively.

Nor has this extent of unemployment been true only for the period of the present acute depression. An examination of the month-by-month reports of the Scandinavian countries points out that unemployment has constituted a problem of a magnitude comparable to that

6

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

of other countries for the whole of the post-war period. This is seen by referring to Chart I (p. 5) giving the trend of employment in Sweden, the United States, and Great Britain. In fact it will be noted that, beginning with the last quarter of 1920, employment in Sweden fell sharply to the close of 1922 when there was but 65 per cent of employment, whereas at the same time Great Britain had 81 per cent of its workers employed, and for the United States the lowest index number of employment (coming in the first quarter of 1922) reached only to 83 ( 1 9 2 3 = 100). It will also be seen that a higher degree of employment existed in our own country than in Sweden for all of the years until the middle of 1930 when employment decreased markedly for both the United States and Great Britain. Again when one turns to seasonal variations in employment one finds in the Scandinavian countries very great periodic increases of unemployment during the year comparable to or exceeding in degree that experienced by advanced industrial countries. T o take the same period as that given above ( 1 9 2 7 - 1 9 3 3 ) , Table I I below gives, for Denmark, the percentage of unemployment reported by the month. An examination of statistics for Norway 6 and for Sweden7 presents an essentially similar degree of seasonality. ' Cf. Institutet for Historie og Samfundsfkonomi, 0konomi og Polilik, Copenhagen 1932, 6 Aargang: Nr. 2, p. 103, Nr. 4, p. 265. See also Table XIV, Appendix C, p. 160. ' Cf. Svenska Handelsbanken Index, Stockholm, Vol. VII, No. 77, May 1932, p. 1 6 3 ; No. 83, Nov. 1932, p. 323. See also Table X V , Appendix C, pp. 161-164.

INTRODUCTION

7

TABLE II PERCENTAGE OF UNEMPLOYMENT IN DENMARK BY MONTHS, 1927-1934*

January February March April May June July August September October November December

1927

1928

1929

>93°

1931

1932

1933

1934

3i 8 31-2 26.2

29.9 26.2 21.6 16.8 14.2

27.7 29.7 21.8

19 9

24.2

20. J

13 3

44-4 43-7 36.9 30.5

34 4

11.6

34-1 35-9 37-i

23.0 19.1 18.0 17.2 16.4 16.0

13 5 13.6

13 i 12.2

i7J

14-5

31.6

28.4

21.8

17.7

10.8 10.0 9.6

«S3

22.1

9 4 8-7 9 3

12.3

9-1 8-7

9.0 9.0

22.4

11.4 i SS 25.1

10.1 130

24 5 >5 3

11

-3 11.8 11.8 12.1

15 8 22.1 32.2

Source: Iiutitutet for Historic og Samfundttkonomi, the International Labour Review, (See fn.*.)

27.7 24.8

2J.6 28.7

29.2 304 31 8 35-1 4*-3

25.0 21.9 21.7 21.4

20.9 23.2 25.7

375

Copenhagen; and

It is true, of course, that the mass unemployment in Scandinavia has been a development of the post-war period9 but during the whole of that period it has been *Institutet, o f . cit., 6 Aargang: Nr. i, p. 16; Nr. 2, p. 88j Nr. 3, p. 175; Nr. 4, p. 2jo. /.LJ?., Vol. XXIX, No. 3, March 1934, p. 416. *The unemployment percentages for the period previous to the beginning of mass unemployment, so far as they are available are as follows : For Denmark the annual unemployment percentages for all workers— 1910, 10.7;

1 9 1 1 , 9.55 1 9 1 2 , 7.6;

1 9 1 3 , 7.5; 1 9 1 4 . 9-9; >915»

*•'»

1916, 5.1; 1917, 9.7; 1918» 18.1; (International Labour Review, Vol. XV, No. 3, March 1917, pp. 454-457) : For Norway the unemployment percentages among trade union members—1913» 2.8; 1914, 2.4; 1915, 2.1; 1 9 1 6 , 0.8;

1 9 1 7 , 0.9;

1 9 1 8 , 1.4;

1919,

i.6;

1920, 2 . 3 ;

1921,

17.6

(Statistik Arbok for Kongeriket Norge 51 de. A organg, 1931, p. 138): For Sweden the unemployment percentages among trade union members— 1 9 1 1 , 5.6; 1 9 1 2 , 5.4; 1 9 1 3 , 4.4; 1914, 7.3; 1 9 1 J , 7.2; 1916, 4.0; 1 9 1 7 ,

4.0; 1918, 4.6; 1919, 5-5; 1920, 5.4; 1921, 26.6 (Staiens

Ofentliga

8

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

one of the most pressing governmental problems and it is now "the incomparably most important practical probCHART

II

E X T E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN S W E D E N , N O R W A Y , AND D E N M A R K ,

1910-1933» A

* For the sources from which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C, Tables X I V , X V , and XVI, pp. 160, 161-164., a n d 165-167 respectively.

lem." 10 As has been the case in other countries, national and international factors have played their part in the Utredningar 1931: 20, Socialdefartementet, Arbetslöshetens Omfattning Karaktär och Orsaker, Stockholm 1931, p. 58). 10 General Export Association of Sweden, Swedish Exfort, Vol. X V I I , No. 8, Aug. 1933, p. 62.

9

INTRODUCTION

increase of unemployment with cause and effect being seen possibly more directly in the three Scandinavian countries than in the larger European nations. In the post-war years three peaks in the numbers of unemployed have occurred as seen in Chart II showing the extent of unemployment in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark for the years 19201933. The first of these was the so-called "peace-crisis" (fredskrisen) of 1920-1921. In Sweden where the percentage of trade union members who were unemployed in 1919 was only 4.4, it rose sharply to 25.7 in 192021. 1 1 This crisis, essentially international in character, brought about the stoppage of production entirely, or in large part, in the export industries. For Sweden it included especially the mining, steel, lumbering, paper pulp, and shipping industries.12 The second period of marked increase in unemployment, that of 1925-1926, was in the case of Denmark greatly aggravated—if not brought on—by the national policy of deflation. The announced object of the Danish Government in 1925 was to restore its currency to par. To its monetary policy was attributed a sharp decline in the price level, the wholesale price index falling abruptly from 234 in January 1925 to 163 in September of that year. The industrial depression which followed immediately led to an increase of unemployment by approximately 50 per cent.18 The extreme severity of unemployment in Denmark may be seen clearly in Chart uStatens

Offentliga

Utredmngar,

1931:

30,

Socialdefartementet,

of.

cit., p. j 9. U

E.

G.

International " I J. J.,

HUBS, " T h e Labour

Campaign

Review,

Vol. X V I , No.

Against

Unemployment

V o l . V I , N o . 5, N o v .

1 3 , 28 D e c . 1 9 2 5 , p p .

in

1922, p.

25-26.

Sweden," 723.

10

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

II. T h e third period of rapid growth of the numbers of unemployed in the Scandinavian countries has been, in common with that of other nations, since 1930. In Scandinavia, however, a considerable difference in the timing of the industrial slump can be seen, coming earlier in Denmark and Norway than in Sweden, and quickly reaching the extreme severity, in the case of Denmark, at the end of January of 1933 of nearly half of all trade union members of the country being wholly unemployed. 14 Such then, in brief, is the development and nature of the unemployment problem in the Scandinavian countries. T h e burden of unemployment, accentuated greatly by the severity of seasonal decreases of industrial and agricultural activity, has made this problem the most important social question. The keen political social democracy, to which I have alluded above, finds expression in each of the national governments in a Department of Social A f fairs with extensive social functions. T h e expression of employers and workers has been made constant and effective by virtue of possibly the most completely organized groups on both sides which are found in Europe today. It is quite clear that these factors would call forth thoroughgoing programs of unemployment relief. And not only has such been the case but also they have been undertaken in national areas sufficiently small in size and with a relatively high degree of political stability to give something of an approach to laboratory, experimental con" T h e National Bank of Denmark report on unemployment was 44.4.%. (The statistics of the public labor exchanges place the number much higher than the unemployment insurance societies. Cf. I.L.I., Vol. XLVII, No. i , 3 July 1933, p. 3).

INTRODUCTION

ii

trol so desirable in an examination of social economic measures and their results. In the following chapters we shall consider, in turn, each of the three programs of relief which has been carried on, namely, cash relief, unemployment insurance, and public works.

PART I UNEMPLOYMENT

RELIEF

IN T H E SCANDINAVIAN C O U N T R I E S :

ADMINISTRATION

II CASH, OR D I R E C T ,

RELIEF

i. The Function, Amount and Relative Importance of Direct Relief . . T H O U G H the unemployment relief programs of the Scandinavian countries have been grounded upon the "work principle" as against the "maintenance principle," 1 each of these countries has maintained a coordinated relief program in which cash payments have played a very important part. 2 T h e inflexibility or inadequacy of unemployment insurance, subsidies to private enterprises, and public works has been clearly demonstrated in the three

periods

of

exceptionally

heavy

unemployment

pointed out above. Government reports and statistics sup1

Especially true for Sweden as pointed out by Dr. E. G. Hu&s, DirectorGeneral of the Swedish Social Board (Cf. "The Organization of Public Works and other Measures for the Relief of Unemployment in Sweden," 1.L.R., Vol. XXVL, No. i, July 1931, pp. 26-50). See also the statement of Mr. Steincke, Minister of Social Affairs in Denmark (I.L.I., Vol. XLII, No. 3, 18 Apr. 1932, pp. 89-90, 106) ; and that of Mr. Hvidsten, government unemployment inspector in Norway ( I . L J . , Vol. XVIII, No. 2, 1 Apr. 1926). "Cash" relief or payments in the following discussion will refer only to allowances made directly by the national or/and local governments to the unemployed. Such payments are, of course, also connected with unemployment insurance grants by the Government under the Ghent system. The latter is, however, excluded from consideration at this point and will be taken up in Chapter IV.

16

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

port the significant fact that under the different methods employed by each of the countries, governmental cash allowances were required to "take up the slack" to a very large extent. The coordinated character of the relief program and the function of cash relief is seen, in the case of Sweden, in Chart I I I which relates total unemployment to kinds of relief given (work and cash) and the annual expenditure by the State for the period from 1 9 2 2 on. It will be noted that the number of unemployed, of those given relief in the form of work, and of those given relief in the form of cash move together. Furthermore it will be seen that work relief has carried the major part of the burden of unemployment with cash relief increasing each year during the winter months. This was true up to the summer of 1 9 3 1 . At this point the curves of unemployment moved up sharply, which is especially noticeable in the one giving numbers of applicants for work reported by the Unemployment Commission's district offices. During this period it may be observed that the number given work on public projects did not increase at the same rate, whereas the number given cash relief increased immediately and quickly. This was very notably the case beginning in midsummer of 1 9 3 2 and again in 1 9 3 3 . The reports made by Dr. E . G. Huss, Director-General of the Swedish Social Board, confirm this interpretation of the nature of the unemployment relief program. In the 1 9 2 1 unemployment period in Sweden, of 81,500 workers given aid in 44,500 cases this was in the form of cash al-

CASH, OR DIRECT, RELIEF CHART

17

III

T H E N U M B E R OF U N E M P L O Y E D W O R K E R S , K I N D S OF R E L I E F G I V E N , AND T H E A N N U A L E X P E N D I T U R E IN S W E D E N ,

1920-1933*

* F o r the sources f r o m which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C, Tables X V and X X , pp. 1 6 1 - 1 6 4 and 1 7 8 - 1 8 4 . respectively.

18

SCANDINAVIAN U N E M P L O Y M E N T

lowances,8 and to come down to the third period (that is to say, the present one) of exceptional unemployment experienced by that country the following table, prepared by Dr. Huss, indicates the importance of cash (or socalled "direct") relief. By March of 1932, according to the above report of Director-General Huss, of the 43,764 receiving unemployment relief through state collaboration, 25,003 were given direct, or cash, payments} and of the 18,431 assisted by the communes alone, 7,047 received cash relief. In the case of Norway and Denmark the importance of cash payments, per se, in the unemployment relief programs is much more difficult to estimate in view of the fact that federal government grants to the unemployment insurance funds are tied up with cash relief disbursements in such a manner as to make their separation quite impossible. T h e public grants to unemployment insurance funds have become essentially "doles," i.e., payment of direct cash relief rather than a predetermined amount of the premium-cost of "insurance." Nevertheless, the function of such cash relief has been the same for Norway and Denmark as for Sweden, namely, to supplement the relatively inflexible or inadequate unemployment insurance and public works arrangements. As indicative of this part which the cash payments * It should, h o w e v e r , be p o i n t e d out t h a t these a l l o w a n c e s a m o u n t e d to 4,698,500 year

of

Kr.

of

the t o t a l

42,582,000

ployment,"

of,

tit.,

Kr. p.

federal

(C/., 732)

E.

unemployment

G.

Huss,

Monetary

expenditure

"Campaign

sums t h r o u g h o u t

for

Against the

that

Unem-

discussion

w i l l be l e f t in the " k r o n a , " the o l d p a r v a l u e b e i n g i d e n t i c a l f o r D e n m a r k , N o r w a y , a n d S w e d e n , n a m e l y , 26.8 cents.

CASH, OR

DIRECT,

RELIEF

19

T A B L E III S T A T I S T I C S ON

UNEMPLOYMENT

ASSISTANCE

G R A N T E D IN

1930

SWEDEN,

I930-I932

1932

I93I

Applicants and Form of Assistance Granted Sept.

Number of applicants for relief Number assisted: (1) With State collaboration: a. State works b. State-commune... c. Cash relief

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

8,589 3 1 . 9 0 1 4 l > 8 8 5 3 I . O J 7 4 0 . 3 7 7 88,761 109,674

J . 395 3 . 5 2 ' 6.544 6,620 6,980 9,256 1 4 . 2 4 5 863 2 , 4 1 5 4,516 381 1,502 1,199 13 234 3.422 2 . 7 7 2 3 . 8 8 7 11,869 25,003

Total Per cent of applicants (a) B y communes: a. Works b. Cash

1,408 4 . 1 3 6 11,468 10,591 » . 7 3 0 2 3 . 5 4 0 4 3 . 7 6 4

Total Per cent of applicants Total assisted:

1,414 6,904 10,624 5 . 4 7 2

(1) and (2) Per cent o f total applicants

2,822 11,040 22,092 16,063 17,729 38,308 62,195

>6-3

13 0

27 3

34 I

29.1

26.5

39 9

8,723 6,045

",384 7.047

5.999 14.758

18,431

743 3 . 1 3 5 6,587 4,078 4 . 5 2 2 671 3 . 7 6 9 4 . 0 3 7 1 . 3 9 4 1 . 4 7 7

16.5

328

21.6

34 6

25-4

52.7

17.6

5i-7

14.8

43-9

16.6

43-1

16.8

56.7

Source: E. A. Huss, " T h e Organization of Public Works and Other Measures for the Relief of Unemployment in Sweden," I.L.R., Vol. X X V I , No. i , July, 1932, pp. 26-50.

played in the whole program of unemployment relief, one may take the report of the State Inspector of Public Labor Exchanges and Unemployment Insurance of Nor-

20

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

way. Table I V , which follows, covers the first period of exceedingly heavy unemployment. T A B L E IV UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF EXPENDITURE IN N O R W A Y ,

(In thousands of

State Relief Works

1919-20... 1920-21... 1921-22... 1922-23...

I9I9-I923

Kr.) 4

Grants Grants Grants to Com- to Com- to Unmunal employmunal Direct ment Relief Relief Funds Works

55° 5.38I 22,008 19,386

130 1,285 6,179 4,001

1

823

76 2,680 1.043

4.703 6,570 1,861

T o t a l . . . 47.325

11.595

3.800

13.957

Other Measures

18 70

Loans Total to Com(Includmunal ing Relief Loans) Works

1,522

339 453

2,758 9,307 1,725

14,273 47.o 8 3 28,469

880

13,790

91.347

Source: Statcns Inspcktorat for Arbeidsjormidlingen og Arbeidsledighetsjorsikringen: Arsberetning, 1922^23, Oslo 1924 (I.L.R., Vol. X I , No. 2, pp. 252-253).

T h e use of cash relief indicated in the above table (especially under "Grants to Communal Direct R e l i e f " and "Grants to Unemployment F u n d s " ) in the first period of specially severe unemployment became increasingly necessary in the two more recent periods and resulted in national budgetary difficulties. 8 T h e Ministry of Social Affairs of Norway appointed, in M a y 1930, an unemployment committee, and in the report which it has rendered recently (April 1932) it emphasizes the provisional and burdensome character of relief payments. A short minority 4

These expenditures are those of the national government only.

* Industria,

Argang

XXVIII,

Nr. 12, 3 June 1932, pp. 300-301.

C A S H , OR D I R E C T , R E L I E F

21

report, however, demands unemployment cash payments guaranteeing subsistence to the unemployed which in no way would be connected with the poor relief system.6 This is where the matter stands at present. In the case of Denmark the provision covering cash payments in the unemployment relief program of that country is exceptionally thorough in its organization, and its continuity. An exceedingly effective national plan exists possessing elements of strength in the development and functioning of the cash relief part of the unemployment program not found, to the writer's knowledge, in any other country. The plan, a part of the Unemployment Act of January i , 1922, is administered through the Central Unemployment Fund that has been instituted for the double purpose of paying unemployment cash relief and subsidizing relief work. For the purpose of the point under discussion —that of cash relief—it is difficult to say to what extent the Fund has served one purpose more than the other, since the government statistical records (as will be seen in Table V which follows) give merely "total receipts" and "total expenditures." Recourse is had to this Fund for a particular industry or for all industry in general on the decision of the Minister of the Interior, after a consultation with a committee of sixteen members appointed by the Parliament. The Fund is financed by means of employers' contributions (paid by those employers subject to the compulsory accident insurance law), by State grants, and by grants from recognized unemployment in' Arbeiderbladet, 16 March 1932 (I.L.I., Vol. XLII, No. 3, pp. 87-88).

22

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

surance societies.7 The amount of the employers' contributions was originally fixed by the Minister of the Interior with due consideration for the average of unemployment occurring in each industry. The State grant to the Fund for 1922 was 7,OCX),000 Kr. and in subsequent years it was equal to a third of the sum paid out by the Fund during the preceding year. Recognized unemployed insurance societies under the 1922 Act paid into the Fund one-third of the total amount of the contributions received by them. Benefits are paid from the Fund in periods of exceptional unemployment to unemployed persons who are members of a recognized unemployment insurance society but have exhausted their rights to benefits, or have dependents, or satisfy certain other conditions which will be fixed by special regulations. This benefit will be paid by local authorities of the district in which the unemployed person is a resident, and two-thirds of the sums paid out will be refunded to the local authorities by the Fund. 8 This is the organization of unemployment cash relief in Denmark which has been functioning since January 1, 1922. The financial operation of the plan, as well as its relative importance in the whole program of unemployment relief, may be seen in the statistics below. Section 7

Under the Act of J u l y i , 1 9 2 7 , the employers' contributions have been 2 K r . per worker per year for rural workers and 3 K r . for others. T h e maximum of the whole Fund was set at 12,000,000 K r . (originally 50,000,000 K r . ) . An increase of the employers' contribution to 4.50 K r . ( f o r industrial workers) was proposed by the Ministry of Social Affairs in the Danish Parliament on March 22, 1 9 3 3 . ' / . I . / . , Vol. I, No. 5, 3 Feb. 1 9 2 2 , pp. 1 5 - 1 8 .

CASH, OR D I R E C T , RELIEF

23

TABLE V FINANCING OF UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT SYSTEM—DENMARK, 1 9 2 2 - 1 9 3 1

(In millions of Kr.) Contribution from Each Source Expressed as a Per Cent of Total Expenditure in the Same Year' Type

Year From Workers

(a) Ordinary Insurance Funds

1900-21 1921-22 1922-23 1923-24 1924-35 1925-26 1926-27 1927-28 1928-29 1929-30 1930-31

45 1 56.1 72.8 64. a 73 2 43 « 487 70.4 74 6 95-3 72.1

(b) Emergency Fund of the Insurance Funds

1/10/2731/3/38 1928-29 1929-30 1930-31

56 5 256.0 959 78.6

(c) Central Unemployment Fund

1/1/2231/3/22 1922-23 1923-24 1924- 35 1925-36 1926-27 1927-28 1928-29 1929-30 1930-31

3 S 10.8 «4

From Employers

From Public Authorities 20 0 20 4 62 7 57 7 71 0 3« 8 as-3 28 9 403 53 6 39 I

96.1 48.5 16.4

10.s 108.4 273 0 77 6 22.8 33.0 48.8 52.6 222.1

135 68 68 130 36 »4 66 70 21 78

9 7 9 I 4 0 7 8 5 3

Total Ordinary Receipts

Total Expenditures

13 5 37.0 29 8 24.0 23 2 ao.9 »3 0 30.4 30 5 30 4 28.6

Z9.9 32.6 »1.7 19.a 15 5 26.4 30.2 30.0 26.0 20.0 24.8

0 I z 1

4 9 2 I

07 o.S 0.5 0.7

9 9 8 7 5 6 8 5 2 2

O 6 2 6 7 0 0 4 6 7

6.6 11.6 4-4 1.8 46 It.2 7 2 41 30 0.8

Excess or Deficit

_ 6. 5

Total Reserve of Fund at End of Year

5 6 + 48 + 77 — 5 5 — 7 2 +04 +4J + 10.5 + 3-8

— I.S - 7.1 + l.O + 5-8 + 13 6 + 8.1 + i-S + 2.0 -(- 6 .6 + 17 I + 21.0

0.3 1 4 + 0.7 04

+ 0.3 + II + 18 + 2.2

—

—

+

+

+a4 —

+

+ + —

+

+ —

+

2 3 S 1 5 0 1 0 1

0 9 8 I z 8 3 4 9

+ a.4 + 0.4 + 43 + 10.0 -f-ii.a + 6.0 + 6.8 + 8.1 + 7-8 + 9 7

Source: International Labour Conference, 17th Session, Geneva 1933, Unemployment Insurance and tie Various Forms 0} Relief ¡or the Unemployed, p. 219.

* A small amount of irregular contribution from public authorities in

24

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

(c), of Table V, gives the data relative to the cash relief plan which has been discussed above. The present status of cash payments in unemployment relief is not adequately indicated in the table above. Under legislation enacted by the Danish Parliament on October j 9 j i 9 3 i (which remained in force until May i , 1932), and again on June 2 1 , 1932 (which covered the period up to April 30, 1 9 3 3 ) the cash relief part of the unemployment program was much further extended. Under the former act farmers and unemployed workers who had exhausted their right to benefit from unemployment insurance funds (and also its emergency fund) were entitled to relief by the local authorities; under the latter act, the number of days for which cash relief was granted was doubled (it was 70 under the 1931 act). 10 Finally, it may be said in this connection that a new law enacted April 25, 1933, which was in force up to September 30, 1933, authorized continued relief payments by the local the form of "Loans and Advances" and also "From Miscellaneous Sources" are not of sufficient importance for our purpose to include in the table. In Section (b) the contribution listed as from the employers is actually from the Central Unemployment Fund and, therefore, only in part from them. 10 Arbeidsgtveren, Copenhagen, 23 Oct. 1 9 3 1 ( I . L . I . , Vol. X L , No. 6 p. 222); Politiken, Copenhagen, 22 June 1932 {I.L.I., Vol. X L I I I , No. 3 pp. 105-106. Details may be obtained from these sources. T h e financing of these measures might, however, be of interest. T h e cost of administering the first of the two acts referred to above was to be borne by local authorities, the Central Unemployment Fund, and the State, 1/6, 1 / 2 , and 1 / 3 respectively. The necessary funds were to be raised in part by "heroic" economies in national defense—which as a gesture aroused, at the time, considerable interest throughout Europe. For the financing of the second act, the local authorities were to be reimbursed by parliamentary grants.

CASH, OR DIRECT, RELIEF

25

authorities to the unemployed, if they had joined a recognized unemployment insurance fund not later than February 15, I 933- 11 Thus far we have been concerned only with the function of cash payments in the unemployment relief program. These payments, in their timing and their extent, have been a demonstration in all of the Scandinavian countries of the inflexibility or inadequacy of the other kinds of unemployment relief, i.e., unemployment insurance and public works. W e shall turn now to a brief examination of that phase of the cash relief program which relates especially to its administration. 1. The Administration of Direct

Relief

It has been pointed out at the opening of this chapter that the Scandinavian unemployment relief program was grounded upon the "work principle." The application of this principle in the administration of the cash relief payments is of special significance and manifests itself most clearly in the case of Sweden with its absence of a government unemployment insurance system. In the coordinated system of relief, the unemployed have in that country no statutory claim to relief. T h e applicant is given individual consideration, and the cash relief which is granted is given only to the able-bodied person involuntarily unemployed, over fifteen years of age, who has not been in receipt of permanent poor relief, and who has applied, without sucu Socialt Tidsskrift, Copenhagen, M a y 1933, (/.£../., Vol. X L V I I , N o . 4, pp. 1 6 3 - 1 6 4 ) . T h e amount of the relief is 3/4, to persons with dependents (and 2/3 to those w i t h o u t ) , of the weekly insurance benefit—but not less than 1 K r . a day.

26

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

cess, to the public employment exchange for work. A local unemployment committee is required in the first place to help the applicant earn a living by his own work, and a person in receipt of cash relief must regularly report to the public labor exchange and is obliged to accept such work as that to which he is assigned. 12 It is seen from this that the public labor exchange is the focal point of administration. There is, however, the additional requirement in Norway and Denmark, in view of the fact that these two countries have governmentally supported unemployment insurance, that the insurance societies—as well as the individual—report unemployment to the public labor exchange. T h e offer of suitable work to the unemployed, by either the exchange or the society, terminates cash relief. 1 8 T h e Scandinavian experience demonstrates the importance, in a coordinated national relief program, of extensive use of public works as a means of facilitating the administration of the cash relief part of that program. T h e offer of employment by the public labor exchange is i-pso facto "suitable work," within limits, and terminates the claim to cash relief. T h e test of an unemployed's willing" E . G. Huss, " T h e Organisation of Public Work," of. cit., pp. 1 8 - 1 9 . Up to 15 J u l y 1 9 2 1 local authorities acted without restriction in expenditure on relief. Since that date, due to the tendency of such authorities to make unnecessary or too liberal an allowance, all unemployment relief allowances have had to be submitted and approved of by the State Unemployment Commission advised by one of their "social counsellors." For a brief discussion of the development and functioning of the public labor exchange system see my Appendix A, Part I I I , pp. 1 4 7 - 1 5 3 .

" IX.I., Vol. I, No. 5, 3 Feb. 1922, p. 16.

CASH, OR DIRECT, RELIEF

*7

ness to work becomes merely a matter of offering him work on a public works project. It is clear, of course, that when government public works are inadequate, the test as to whether an unemployed worker should be given cash relief is much more difficult. In the case of Sweden the ruling adopted in 1932 by the State Unemployment Commission was that an unemployed in order to be granted cash relief shall have less than two days of work a week. 14 This ruling was followed, after a large increase of unemployment and inadequacy of public works, by the reinvoking of a regulation which had been adopted ten years ago, calling for compensatory service in the form of two days work per week (on roads, etc.) for municipalities if cash relief were to be granted. No other means of testing willingness to work existed. T h e strong opposition aroused by the Social Democratic Labor Party caused the Commission to drop this requirement and give the local committees a free hand in this task.18 Finally, one other point of administration may be touched upon—and it is equally difficult as that which has just been discussed. It concerns the question of the amount of the cash allowance and its financing. Without giving details it will suffice to point again to the Swedish experience. During the first period of heavy unemployment— that of 1921-1922—the federal government contribution was fixed at 1.50 Kr. for a married man without chil"Industrie, Argang XXVIII, No. i8, Aug. 1932, p. 449. ™ Social Demokraten, 2$ Aug. 1932 (I.L.I., Vol. XLIII, No. 12) ; Svemka Dagbladet, 8 Oct. 1932 (I.LJ., Vol. X L I V , No. 4, p. I I J ) .

28

SCANDINAVIAN U N E M P L O Y M E N T

dren; I K r . per person over 1 8 years, living alone; 6 0 K r . per young person, 1 5 to 1 8 years; and . 3 0 K r . per child. T h e government's grant could not exceed that of the grant by local authorities. 16 It remains essentially the same now. 1 7 Such, then, has been the function and administration of cash relief payments in the threefold program of Scandinavian unemployment relief. W e turn now to the consideration of a second part in this coordinated system of relief. " E . G . Huss, " T h e Campaign Against Unemployment," of. citp. 730. These allowances did not preclude relief f r o m other sources, but the total could not exceed 2/3 of the earnings of a w o r k e r of his own grade in the district. " Cf., Industria, Argang X X V I I I , No. 1 8 , 26 A u g . 1 9 3 2 , p. 449. ( T h e Danish cash relief payments are the same in amount but with some conditional reductions being possible by local authorities—C}., I.L.I., V o l . X L I I , No. 3, 18 A p r . 1 9 3 2 , pp. 8 8 - 8 9 — b u t , as pointed out above, the contribution by the federal government is not, as in the case of Sweden, approximately 5 0 % of the total expenditure but it is equal to 1 / 3 of the sum paid out by the Central Unemployment Fund during the preceding year.)

Ill UNEMPLOYMENT

INSURANCE

I. The Danish System

U

N E M P L O Y M E N T insurance has been the subject of active discussion, parliamentary investigation, and political controversy in the Scandinavian countries during the whole of the post-war period. This is especially true in the case of Sweden, which has no form of insurance in its social program for unemployment relief, although it has been given the attention of the Swedish Parliament almost annually since 1908 when a motion was introduced calling for an investigation of unemployment as well as "insurance against its economic consequences."1 And it remains today very much an open question, as seen by the vote of the Swedish Parliament during 1

Rorande FriviUig Arbttslosheujorsakring m.m., Med. bitrade av tillkalade sakkuniga utarbetad inom Socialdefartementet, Stockholm, 1933, p. 4. This is an excellent report of a parliamentary committee with the assistance of consulting experts. Although confined primarily to voluntary unemployment insurance, the report contains a very large amount of material over the whole field. Appendix E of forty pages, for example, is a statistical and critical discussion "Concerning the effectiveness of unemployment insurance—the investigation undertaken from the viewpoint of the parliamentary proposal of 1928 for compulsory unemployment insurance." The report also contains an appendix on the development of unemployment insurance in other European countries. It should be added that this final report incorporates much material presented by former committees. 29

30

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

the spring of 1933 on the Government's proposal for a state-subsidized unemployment insurance act. Although approved by the Second Chamber of the Riksdag, it was defeated by the First Chamber with a vote of 71 to 67. A similar act was again introduced in January 1934, the outcome of which has not as yet been reported. The same uncertainty of the status of unemployment insurance has prevailed in Norway even though it has had this measure of relief, organized under the Ghent system (on a state, as opposed to a communal basis), since 1906. This plan of unemployment relief has been amended in 1 9 1 5 , 1 9 2 1 , and 192.3 j and it now extends in its scope to cover all wage-earning groups.2 An act to establish compulsory unemployment insurance, introduced in 1926, and again in 1929, was approved by the government (then Liberal) in 1 9 3 1 , but withdrawn the same year after a change in government.8 The situation in Denmark differs for, while the voluntary unemployment insurance system, which it established in December, 1 9 2 1 , has been amended three times (1924, 1927 and 1932), 4 neither unemployment insurance in general nor the voluntary type in particular has been subject to attack as has been the case in Sweden. Inasmuch as both the Norwegian and Danish unemployment insurance systems are of the voluntary type with organization and administration fundamentally alike, as well as the ' International Labour Conference, of. cit., pp. 4, 68. ' Tidens Tegn, 11 May 1931 (I.L.I., Vol. X X X V I I I , No. 10, p. 378). 'Besides these there have been special relief acts passed in October 1931 and in June 1932.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

3i

function which unemployment insurance has served in the relief programs of the two countries being the same, it will answer our purpose to confine the discussion to the Danish experience in which the unemployment insurance organization has been more fully developed. Such comparisons as are of special interest will be made in the footnote references. The Danish law is based on a system of state and municipal subsidies to unemployment funds constituted by the workers' trade unions.8 According to the Act of 1922, the state subsidy granted to them was equal to 5 0 % of the amount of the members' contributions, while that of the municipality was variable but could not exceed 33 i / 3 % of the members' contribution. The Act of April 1, 1924, reduced these to 3 5 % and 3 0 % respectively. 6 ' N o t necessarily true in Norway. The management of these funds include trade union and non-union workers who may or may not be in the same trade, or even in the same industry. (International Labour Conference, of. cit., pp. 1 3 4 - 2 3 j . ) * But turned over to the workers the administration of their unemployed members, who, before, had been under the direction of the employment exchanges. The unemployment funds were also exempt from the contribution which they had been obliged to pay to the central insurance fund, which was equivalent to j % of the contributions which those funds received. The reduced subsidies necessitated increased contributions from workers. The state subsidy in Norway in 1915 was fixed at 50% of the amount of the benefit paid out by the funds. Temporarily increased in 1 9 1 8 . Act of July 1, 1932, State will pay 5 0 % of benefits paid, which benefits do not exceed 4 Kr. per day and 14 Kr. per week per person. For benefits between 4 and j Kr., State subsidy in respect to part exceeding 4 Kr. is reduced to 2 5 % . If benefits exceed 5 Kr. the State pays no subsidy. But whatever the state subsidy, 2/3 is recoverable from the communes and, therefore, the net contribution from the State amounts to 1/6 of the

32

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT TABLE VI PUBLIC SUBSIDIES OF DENMARK TO INSURANCE

Average Annual Earning for the Members of the Trade Union (in Kr.)

State Grant in Relation to the Members' Contribution 7

Up to 2000 2000-2250 2250-2500 2500-2750 2750-3000 3000-3250 3250-3500 3500-3750 3750-4000 Over 4000 S o u r c e : Statens

UNEMPLOYMENT

FUNDS

90 per cent U 85 « 8 U 80 a 75 " 70 « a 65 " u 55 " a 45 « 30 « a 15 " Socialdepartementet,

Rorande

Frivillig

ArbeUiöshttsjörsäkr'tng M.M., Stockholm, 1933, p. 213. amount paid in benefits. (Arbejdsgiveren, Oslo, 26 Aug. 1932—I.L.I., Vol. XLII, No. 3, pp. 190, 361.) ' The State recovers one-third of its grant from the communes. The State grant under this (1932) Act is considerably greater than it was under the previous (1927) law. T h e latter provided for the following:

Average Annual Earning for the Members of the Trade Union (in Kr.)

State Grant in Relation to the Members' Contribution 70 65 55 45 35 25 IS

Up to 1500 1500-2000 2000-2500 2500-3000 3000-3500 3500-4000 Over 4000

per cent a " " * * u * "

T h e proposal made by the Government in 1933 was for a larger grant by the State than is provided by the law which was passed that year. (Cf.

Sociala

Meddelandert,

1 9 3 2 , Nr.

9, p . 6 7 4 . )

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

33

T h e n the A c t of October i , 1 9 2 7 , changed the basis of public subsidies to v a r y inversely with the average annual earnings of the workers in the trade, rather than a flat percentage of the total of the workers' contributions. T h e s e public grants have now (under the Act of June 23, 1 9 3 2 ) been based upon the scale indicated in T a b l e V I , p. 32, with one-third of the "State g r a n t " being refunded to the State by the communes. A s w i l l be seen by referring to T a b l e V above ( p . 2 3 ) , no contributions are made b y the employers to these " o r d i n a r y " unemployment funds. T h e benefits drawn b y the unemployed workers f r o m these insurance funds under the A c t of 1 9 2 1 (and also that of 1 9 2 4 ) were 4 K r . and 3.50 K r . ( m a x i m a ) per day respectively, according to whether the unemployed persons did or did not have dependents. 8 T h e s e benefits were payable f o r seventy days. A n interesting amendment has been made by the A c t of June 23, 1932. T h e benefits of 4 K r . and 3.50 K r . have been changed to 4 K r . and 3 K r . respectively but in addition to this it is specified that one-third of the stated benefits shall be adjusted on the first of A p r i l each year according to the change in the price level.® 8

But not to exceed 2/3 of the normal w a g e . M i n i m u m 1 K r . per day.

W a i t i n g period

6 to

14 days. Benefit not paid unless hours of

work

reduced by more than 1/3. Benefits not granted during a strike or lockout to the persons involved ( A c t of 1 9 2 1 ) . I f , within the trades covered by a fund, a strike or lockout is organized, no benefit may be granted until the Director has decided to what extent the dispute affects the openings f o r employment ( A c t of 1 9 2 7 ) , ( I . L . I . , V o l . X X I V , No. 4, 24 Oct. 1927, p. 124). * Statens forsdkring,

Socialdefartementet, of. cit., p. 213.

P.M.

Rorande

Frivillig

Arbetsloshtts-

34

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

So much for the ordinary unemployment insurance funds, the contributions which went into their creation and the benefits paid from them. But it was clear to the sponsors of unemployment relief that this was only the first line of defense and that a second would be required. This was created at the same time in order to meet the relief needs during times of "exceptional" unemployment. Such is the function of the Central Unemployment Fund. This Fund we have discussed above as the means of administering that part which cash relief payments play in the unemployment relief program as a whole but, as we have just pointed out, this Central Unemployment Fund serves also in connection with the unemployment insurance system as a "second line of defense." 10 First, as to the contributions necessary to establish the Fund: It will be recalled that it was explained above that the contribution of the State was fixed at 7,000,000 Kr. for the first year of the law (1922), and thereafter at onethird of the expenditure of the Fund during the preceding year. T h e employers' contributions were made to vary according to the industry concerned, the amount per year per worker engaged by the employer varying from 3 Kr. to 15 Kr. with an average of 9 Kr., under the 1921 A c t j and under the 1924 Act, 5 Kr. for all industries excepting agriculture and forestry, which paid 2 Kr. Under the 1927 Act, 3 Kr. and 2 Kr. respectively for industry and agriculture were fixed, but a recent proposal would in10 Neither this Central Unemployment Fund nor the Emergency Fund of the insurance funds (to be discussed) are found in the Norwegian system.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE crease the former to 4 . 5 0 K r .

u

35

Contributions have been

paid by the workers for only three years. 12 N o w as to insurance benefits drawn from this Central Unemployment Fund. W e have referred to the Fund as constituting a "second line of defense"} its object is to meet exceptionally serious unemployment crises, partly by paying supplementary allowance to the unemployed 1 ® who have already exhausted their statutory allowances (and such "supplementary allowances" may be regarded, therefore, accurately as outright cash relief payments, as we have considered them above, rather than "insurance benefits"), and partly by subsidizing relief work. Paying of allowances out of the Fund, consistent with its purpose, is conditional upon the existence of "exceptional" unemployment interpreted, until 1 9 2 4 , solely by the Minister of the Interior. T h e 1 9 2 4 Act, however, defines such unemployment quite exactly. It is whenever in two preceding months unemployment in a given industry exceeds by 5 0 % the average unemployment during the same months in the past fourteen years and in any case when it reaches at least 7 . 5 % of the total number employed in the industry in question. Furthermore, when the unemployment affects not a whole industry, but a branch Meddelser fra Socialraadets Sekretariet, Copenhagen, Vol. I l l , No. 3, Mar. 1933. ( I . L . I . , Vol. X , No. 10, p. 22S.) u 1922-1925 (see Table V, p. 2 3 ) . The contribution amounted to $ % of the total of the payments made to the recognized unemployment insurance societies. Discontinued by the Act of 1924. u Such payments being made by local authorities of the districts in which the unemployed person resides and two-thirds of the sums paid out will be refunded to those authorities by the Fund. (Communication to I.L.O.— I.LJ., Vol. I, No. j , 3 Feb. 1922, pp. 1 7 - 1 8 . ) u

36

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

of the industry, the necessary unemployed minimum to constitute "exceptional" unemployment is 1 5 % of the total employed. Benefits during such times may be paid out of the Central Unemployment Fund to the unemployed who have already exhausted insurance allowances if they were employed at least ten months during the two preceding years. The maximum duration of these benefits is the same as that of the allowances paid by the ordinary unemployment insurance funds. 14 The 1 9 3 1 Act extended the right of benefits to unemployed persons who had not yet established their rights as members of an ordinary unemployment insurance fund and also to unmarried persons under twenty-one years of age. 16 This then, in general, is the organization and operation of the Central Unemployment Fund for exceptional conditions of unemployment. But the Danish unemployment insurance program contains what one might term a "third line of defense," namely, the Emergency Fund of the ordinary insurance funds. This, brought into operation on October 1, 1927, is created (as is indicated in Table V above) by contributions from the unemployment insurance funds from the Central Unemployment Fund, and from the Government. The purpose of this Emergency Fund is clear. With the unprecedented unemployment which developed in the jredskrisen shortly after the war, the need of special re" Meddelser, 15

p.

of. tit., p. 3.

Arbejdsgiveren, 212).

Copenhagen 23 Oct. 1 9 3 1

(I.L.I.,

Vol. X L , No. 6,

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

37

lief developed rapidly. This was due to the fact that continued benefits were required by those who had exhausted their rights under the regulations of the ordinary insurance funds. Also there were those who needed additional benefit for one reason or another. Provisions made in the Acts of 1921 and 1924 to provide for such relief became increasingly difficult to administer, with the result that the October 1, 1927 Act withdrew them and the Emergency Fund was substituted. T h e continued depression, exhausting the right to benefits both of the ordinary and of the emergency funds, has created precisely the same problem of special relief in both cases. T h e result has been that more recent legislation (Act of 1931) authorizes local authorities to exercise practically a free hand in extending relief, with the result that the adherence to the provisions of the unemployment insurance laws is in fact a mere gesture.16 2 . The Unemployment

Insurance Work

of the Swedish Trade

Unions

Before closing the discussion in this chapter on unemployment insurance in the relief programs of the Scandinavian countries, attention should be called to the work of the trade unions in Sweden in maintaining unemployM For the complete details of the provisions of the emergency relief legislation see Arbejdsgiverert, of. cit. T h e inadequacy of unemployment insurance in the program of relief is true, of course, f o r other countries as w e l l . T o take the case of Germany, f o r example, the percentage of the total number of unemployed receiving relief by means of unemployment insurance at the end of January, of A p r i l , of July, and of October, during 1 9 3 1 , was 52.3, 4.3.3, 30.2, and 25.6 respectively. (Industria, Stockholm, Argang X X V I I I , N o . 2, p. 49.)

38

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

ment "insurance" or "benefits" for the members of their organizations. The notable success of the Swedish unions in this field undoubtedly is a large factor in explaining the absence of a governmentally supported unemployment insurance system in that country.17 The indirect influence of this success has, therefore, been of equal significance with such direct results as the unions have accomplished. The efforts of organized labor in Sweden in developing unemployment benefit organizations originated in 1884, but only with the formation of national trade unions has the provision of unemployment benefits become systematic and general. The formation of the Confederation of Trade Unions {Landsorganisattonen) in 1898 greatly stimulated this trade union activity. In some unions the cost of benefit was covered by the ordinary subscriptions in others, separate unemployment societies were formed. As a measure of their success in this field the unions of Sweden may point to the fact that from 1 9 1 0 to 1920 the amount of benefits maintained a fairly uniform level, averaging from 2 Kr. to 5 Kr. a day to the unemployed. While it is true that the total amount paid out by the unions is considerably exceeded by the sums paid out by the State and municipalities, it should also be stated that the twenty-two unemployment societies connected with various national trade unions paid out in 1 9 2 1 alone the sum of 7,945,000 Kr.—an average of 44 Kr. per mem17

On the history of Swedish trade unionism the following works of Sigirid Hansson stand foremost: Den Svenska Fackforeningsrorelsen, (Stockholm, 1 9 2 9 ) ; and Svenskt Fackforengslw under Fem Dennier, (Stockholm, 1 9 3 2 ) .

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

39

ber.18 And to take the more recent years, the total amounts paid out were 2,290,873 Kr. in 19295 3,163,645 Kr. in 1930; and 6,324,710 Kr. in 1931. 19 The usual elements of weakness of trade union unemployment insurance in the work of unemployment relief are obvious. The lack of adequate reserve for exceptionally heavy unemployment, the large number of workers who are not members of trade unions (or, if members, are not covered by insurance plans), and the inequality of benefits paid, are important considerations. But to a degree which makes it very difficult to explain, the trade unions of Sweden have had outstanding strength. According to a recent survey of the International Federation of Trade Unions at Amsterdam the financial strength of Swedish trade unionism was remarkably stronger per capita than that of any other European country.20 With respect to the degree of unionization, practically every trade is almost completely unionized and with very few exceptions the unions are members of the national confederation. On the score of inequality of benefits, the range of benefits from 1.25 Kr. to 5 Kr. per day must be ™ Arbetet, Stockholm, 4 Jan. 1921 (I.L.I., Vol. V , No. 3, pp. 21-22). In the metal industry the average amount paid in 1921 was over 87 K r . per member. " Fackforeningsrorelsen, 30 Sept. 1932 gives a report of unemployment benefits paid by trade unions from the establishment of the Lanisorgamsaiion until 1931. " T h e Landsorganisation (National Confederation) itself—not to mention the national trade unions which are its members—on the 31 Dec. 1930, had a per member capital possession of 99.53 K r . j cash in banks, 47,202,805 K r . ; and an income for the year of 25,013,487 K r . (Industria, Stockholm, Argang X X V I I I , No. 1, 2 Jan. 1932, p. 23.)

40

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

seen with relation to contribution of the workers, which varies from . 1 0 K r . to 1 K r . per worker per week. 21 It may be said, therefore, that the experience of Swedish trade unions with unemployment insurance has been a thorough trial of this type of unemployment relief. It is significant to point out that in spite of the relative financial strength and success which has been attained in that experience, the pressure for state-subsidized unemployment insurance has been developed so strongly by organized labor during the last several years that it has become a national issue which must definitely be met. The delays, controversies, and investigations are not indicative of a public refusal to incorporate into the Swedish unemployment relief program governmentally supported unemployment insurance. And the same may undoubtedly be said regarding the movement in Norway for a compulsory rather than the voluntary type of unemployment insurance which it now possesses. Such has been the organization and administration of unemployment insurance in the Scandinavian countries. That it has not stood alone as an adequate program of unemployment relief is clearly seen by its results; and that it was not intended to do so is evidenced by the fact that each of the countries has fully recognized that relief to the unemployed calls for a coordination of cash payments, of insurance benefits, and of public works. We shall now consider what place public works have taken in the unemployment programs. a

Sociala Meddelanden, Stockholm, 1 9 2 3 , Nos. 1-8. The last changes of certain national trade unions with regard to their unemployment benefit regulations are given in Koranic Frivillig Arbetsloshetsforsdkring, of. cit., pp. 2 1 8 - 2 1 9 .

IV PUBLIC WORKS I. The Development and Organization in Sweden

I

N S E E K I N G an answer to the very controversial question, Just what can be done in the relief of unemployment by the use of public works? one can turn to the experience of the Scandinavian countries, and especially Sweden, as certainly being one of the most thoroughgoing tests of this program, relative to the size of territory involved, that has ever been undertaken. As has been pointed out by the Head of the Swedish Board, " T h e 'work principle' remains the backbone of the whole system" of their unemployment relief. And this principle has been given its test in Sweden for a longer continuous period than probably has been the case in any other country. This chapter will be confined to an examination of the Swedish experience except for brief comments, at the close of the chapter, on the work of Norway and Denmark in this field. In past years the economic difficulty caused by unemployment was regarded in Sweden as a problem of the poor relief organization within the local communities, but as early as 1847 and again in 1853 such organizations were given the right to appeal to their own province (lansstyrelsen) for assistance. Even at that time the re41

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

sponsibility of the national government was recognized by increasing the size of the parliamentary grant to the special fund ( Undsattningsjonden) that was held for the alleviation of general misfortune. With the general need and unemployment caused by the failure of grain yields from 1866 to 1869 an extended support by provincial and national governments occurred. In many provinces laborrelief committees were established and with their subcommittees had charge of the funds received from the state, province, and commune. For especially pressed sections the National Parliament relieved the situation by grants for the support of canal, road, bridge, wharf, and other building projects. Without tracing in detail the background of Sweden's extensive public works program, which it has maintained for many years, it might be said that almost continuous development in a coordinated program has taken place. Very early the Riksdag definitely recognized unemployment as a national problem to be centered within the administration of the National Board of Trade. More especially during the years 1907 to 1909 one can see the governmental "recognition arrived at that relief no longer was a matter of poor laws but rather one of providing opportunities for work," end that this was the nation's duty. 1 1 Statens Arbetsloshetskomrmssionen, Det Svenska SamhalUt och Arbetslosheten, 1 9 1 4 - 1 9 2 4 , (Stockholm, 1 9 2 9 ) , pp. 1 1 - 2 3 . This official report of the State Unemployment Commission, covering every aspect of its work for the period of 1 9 1 4 - 1 9 2 4 is extremely complete. For the period after this publication I shall draw upon the excellent works of Director-General of the Social Board, Dr. E . G. Huss (which have been quoted above)

PUBLIC WORKS

43

W e see, therefore, that the work of the National Unemployment Commission since 1914 has been the outgrowth of a lengthy development rather than the transitory expedient of war and post-war maladjustment.2 The organization of the public works program, while highly centralized in the National Unemployment Commission, has also a thoroughly developed decentralized structure. As constituted the Commission had no authority other than being instructed by Parliament to give advice to provincial and communal relief committees and to be directly responsible to the National Social Board. Provincial governments were requested to set up communal authorities or committees (kommunala myndigheter) to whom should be assigned the responsibility for utilizing and recording the funds to be used by them. In addition to these local committees, provincial relief committees (lânshjâlpkommittéer) were charged with the duty of taking "measures which in the main are found applicable for counteracting unemployment in the province." Reports of the work were required to be sent to the National Social Board.8 and also upon press reports and the investigations of parliamentary committees. ' O n e might point out parenthetically a remarkably parallel action of the Swedish Unemployment Commission in 1914. and our w o r k under the National Industrial Recovery Act. T h e Commission called in representatives of labor and of industry. Collective agreements were brought up f o r question, the legal power questioned from the employers' side, and agreements made between workers and employers in order to further production. T h e Commission published a warning to employers and farmers to avoid discharging workers. * Statens Arbetsloshetskommission, of, A , Secs. II and III, below, pp. 1 4 5 - 1 5 3 .

cit.,

pp.

30-37. C f .

Appendix

44

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

Another point of organization which is highly important in the functioning of the system of government works is that of the "Social Counsellor" (Sociala ombud), who acts as a liaison official between the central and local administrations. Social Counsellors, attached to the staff of the Unemployment Commission, make a detailed examination of all factors involved in the approval of the Commission for support of activities suggested by the local authorities.4 2. The Selection

of

Projects

So much for organization, now as to the selection of the projects to be carried on by the government in its unemployment relief program. T h e basic principles upon which the whole public works program of Sweden rests are clear-cut. Upon local authorities, on the one hand, is placed the responsibility of relieving unemployment, and in this they are to be financially assisted by the Government if they are willing to apply certain principles formulated by the Government and to submit to its direction and control. Upon the Unemployment Commission, on the other hand, is put the obligation of initiating public works in conformity with the following criteria. In the first place, the works must be in the public interest and of such a kind that the principal expense involved is labor cost.5 ' E. G. Huss, " T h e Campaign Against Unemployment," of. cit., pp. 724-725. Cf. Statens Arbetsloshetskommission, of. cit., Part III, Chap. 3, "Hjalfverksamhetens Organisation." 'Ibid., pp. 723-726. Apropos of this Dr. Huss has given the following distribution of cost for the fiscal year 1930-1931 (see his "Organization of Public Works," p. 45) :

PUBLIC WORKS

45

Secondly, the work should be at a place near the unemployment center, and such that would not demand highly skilled labor. A n d , thirdly, the work should be of such a character that it could be left unfinished when (and i f ) unemployment

decreased

before

completion

of

the

project. 8 T h e projects selected in accordance with these principles have been threefold: those carried on by the State, those operated by communes, and those organized by the State and commune combined.1 T h e relative importance of Cost per Man—Day Item

Central Administration Work places: (1) Labor cost: Wa«es Local allowances Social benefits (2) Management (3) Other expenses Total

In Er.

In Per Cent of Total

o-ìì

4-7

4-4* 023 0.71 0.4s 0 93 707

6J S

3-3

xo.o 6.3 13 a 100.0

For complete information on this question see infra, Appendix C, Table X X I , pp. 186-187. ' Socuda MeeUelanden, Stockholm* 1 9 1 3 , No. 1 A, (I.L.I., Vol. V, No. 3, p. n ) . The Minister of Social Affairs confirmed these principles as being those which were, and would be, followed (I.L.I., Vol. X X X V I I I , No. 2, 13 Apr. 1 9 3 1 , p. 3 5 ) . The projects which most nearly conform to these principles and are usually chosen are highway, railway, port, harbor, power station, waterway, land drainage, forestry, parks, and monument construction, or improvement work on them. (E. G. Huss, "Organization of Public Works," of. cit., p. 3 1 ) . * E. G. Huss, op. cit., pp. 46-48. Wages, in the total cost of the mixed projects, were estimated to amount to 4,740,000 Kr. The State contribution to wages, according to Dr. Huss, varies from 3 0 % to 9 0 % in the different communities.

46

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

each of these in the national program of unemployment relief may be seen in Chart IV below. Certain significant C H A R T

IV

W O R K E R S ON G O V E R N M E N T R E L I E F P R O J E C T S IN S W E D E N ,

1922-1933*

* For the sources from which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C, T a b l e X X , pp. 178-184.

conclusions may be'drawn from it. First, the total number of workers employed on public projects increases each

PUBLIC WORKS

47

year during the winter months. Secondly, contraction of public work has occurred each year at the end of the winter period and as private industrial and agricultural enterprise gets under way. Thirdly, the State, the commune, and the State-commune projects increase and decrease together, apparently carrying the same proportional amount of the total burden from year to year. Complete monthby-month statistical records are given in the statistical appendix (Appendix C, Table X X , pp. 178-184). It is clear that equally important with the size—both absolute and relative—of these public works projects in their effectiveness in relieving unemployment would be the number, the scope, and the distribution of these projects. Recognizing this, the Unemployment Commission on the advent of its work sent out a questionnaire (August 1914) to all the departments and administrations in both the national and provincial governments for the purpose of determining what projects were already entered upon and what were immediately available. In the scope of this inquiry were included military, naval, prison, post office, telegraph, railway, highway, waterways, waterfalls, public health, social, public domain, agriculture, and construction departments (or administrative divisions) of the national government and all of the corresponding divisions of the provinces.8 A similar inventory was again made in 1930.9 * Statens Arbetsloshetskommission, of. cit., p. 41. * In the report of the Social Board to Parliament in 1930 a very complete record of the findings is given. These tables are given in the report of the board of experts, under the chairmanship of Mr. Sigfrid Hansson, "P. M. Angatnde Beredskafsarbeten till Motverkande av Arbetsloshet," Stockholm, 1933, p. 13 fi.

4-8

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

T o come next to the financing of the projects. The type of project would naturally determine its method of payment. Projects of the first and third types, viz., state enterprises, are financed by parliamentary unemployment appropriations. T h e Swedish Government, through the Social Board, introduces a bill in the Parliament asking for an appropriation sufficient for the ensuing fiscal year. Projects of the second type, viz., commune-state, are financed by the granting of subsidies out of the parliamentary appropriations after the Unemployment Commission has received applications from the various communes, which applications have been accompanied by complete information which the Commission has found satisfactory. The state subsidy normally does not exceed half the amount paid to the workers engaged on the project, although during 1932, in view of the severity of unemployment and the increasing financial weakness of local authorities, the Government found it necessary to agree to a considerable increase in the regular state contribution toward joint relief works.10 3. Administration of Public

Projects

T h e administration of the public works in the unemployment relief program shows what likewise character® ï . G. Huss, " T h e Organization of Public Works," of. cit., p. 47 (Cf. also Dagens Ny he ter, i M a y 1932—J.L.I., Vol. X L I I , No. 7, p. Another form of the financing of public works has been that of the State extending interest-free loans to the provinces. T o what extent this has been done the writer is unable to determine. It is referred to briefly in the official report of the Unemployment Commission covering the period of 1914-1924.

PUBLIC WORKS

49

izes other phases of that program in the Scandinavian countries and especially in Sweden, namely, a great degree of responsibility in originating measures of relief on the part of the subordinate governmental divisions and also, at the same time, a high degree of centralization in administration on the part of the national government. As we have seen, the agency of the national government, in the case of Sweden, is the Unemployment Commission. This Commission was granted freedom to establish its methods in consonance with industrial changes, and "the solutions obtained empirically led later to general principles"—as the Commission has put it. T h e contract between the municipal authorities and the Commission specifies the division of duties, but the important reservation of the Commission is that it may discontinue the work at any time and thereby adjust the volume of the government work to that of the changes in the supply of work in the private labor market. T h e contract also binds the local authority to complete and to maintain the project. Thus there is the assurance that the enterprise will serve a productive purpose. 11 As to the administration of the workers themselves, it suffices to say that this is consistent with the principles stated above. T h e State does not legally recognize any claim against itself for relief. T h e unemployed workers apply to the local unemployment committee for relief, and it is the obligation of that committee to examine the conditions of the ordinary labor market in its community, the finances of the local authorities, and then, if necessary, make its application 11

Ibid., pp. 32-33.

SO

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

to the U n e m p l o y m e n t Commission for its approval to organize public works and for the Commission's financial support. T h e local committee must supply the Commission with all information which w o u l d be relevant in determining the need of action upon the part of the national government. 1 2 A l t h o u g h the need of each unemployed individual is determined by the examination of the local committee, there is no restriction as to occupational group, the degree of skill or education, or any other limitation on the right of application. 13

4. Wage Policy In the matter of the wage policy to be maintained in connection with the government public works

Sweden

has found it the most controversial and difficult problem in the w h o l e of its unemployment relief program. T h e principle established b y the U n e m p l o y m e n t Commission is easily stated and explained. T h e principle is t h i s — wages on relief works shall be higher than the cash relief payments but lower than the wages on the private labor market. T h i s policy, the Commission itself asserts, has " i n a high measure accounted for the fact that the gigantic 12

Ibid., pp. 34-35-

Statens Arbetsloshetskommission, op. cit., p. 202. Applications f r o m office workers and business employees have as a matter of fact been numerous. F o r persons under 20 or 25 years of age study courses in technical or general subjects are arranged, at which 5 to 8 hours of daily attendance is required in order that cash relief be granted. T h e first quarter of 1932 there were 256 courses being offered in 73 different places, supported by State grant. (Industria, drgang X X V I I I , No. 10, 6 M a y 1932. p. 2 5 5 . ) T h e Danish Unemployment A c t of 1921 also provides for government support to educational courses, and attendance at these likewise may be declared compulsory f o r persons in receipt of benefit. u

PUBLIC WORKS

51

unemployment in Sweden has been reduced to normal proportions faster than in most of the European countries."14 The explanation of such a wage policy is obvious —it shall be more desirable to the worker to accept public relief work than cash relief} it shall be less desirable for him to continue in the public relief work than it is to accept private industrial and agricultural work. No parliamentary or other direction was given to the Commission, and the application of the principle was left in its hands. At least this was true until 1932 when the Riksdag directed the Commission to "consider agricultural and forestry work wages, and partly consider the conduct of the work so as to employ the largest number of workers." 15 The wage level in the private labor market below which the government relief works wage should be kept is the "lowest wage level noted in each locality as applicable to a comparatively large number of unskilled workers." With this as a basis the local public relief work's wage is set to be about 20% below the wage in the commune where the unskilled wage level is the highest. The communes having a lower wage level in the private labor market would have, therefore, a smaller differential between private and public wages.18 M

Ibid., p. 203. " Industria, Ârgang, X X V I I I . No. 24. 18 Nov. 1932, pp. 603-60+ (The Government had shortly before become Social-Democratic). The Director-General of the Social Board calls attention, in one place, to the fact that Parliament insisted in 1922 that the "Unemployment Commission inquire into rates current for manual labor in the open market within the district where relief was established and fix maximum, not to exceed in any case 2/3 of these current rates." W E . G. Huss, "The Organization of Public Works," of. cit., p. 37.

52

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

After much criticism on all sides regarding the wage policy, the Unemployment Commission, in July 1932, requested information from the communes throughout the country regarding the manual labor wage in the private labor market. Replies from 445 communes pointed out that the wages paid on public projects by the Unemployment Commission were below the private wage level in not less than 374 communes. The extent to which the Commission was below is given in the following table: T A B L E VII W A G E S ON PUBLIC W O R K S IN S W E D E N R E L A T I V E TO T H E W A G E L E V E L IN T H E OPEN

LABOR

MARKET

Number of Cases

Public Wages Below Private Wages

19 67 152 118 18

At least 3 Kr. per day 2 Kr. to 3 Kr. per day I Kr. to 2 Kr. per day .50 Kr. to I Kr. per day .Jo Kr. per day

Source: Industria, Ar gang XXVIII, No. 23, 4 Nov., 1932, p. 581.

In pursuing the principles of the wage policy which the Commission had adopted it is clear that a considerable variation in the wages paid on public works would result. According to the Social Board, the Commission's wage payment in March 1932 ranged from a low figure of 3.45 Kr. to the highest payment of 7.00 Kr. per day, with wages in the private labor market for unskilled workers

PUBLIC WORKS

53

varying in different sections of the country from 3.50 Kr. to 9.00 Kr. per day. 17 In general the result, within the last year or two, seems to have been a wage payment on public works amounting to nearly 1 5 % less than the trade union rates. It is significant to see, therefore, that the statement in the last unemployment relief bill, enacted in 1933, amounts to a repudiation of the former wage policy, for it provides for wages on public works to be "the lowest wages for unskilled workers for which work can be found on a considerable scale in the locality." 18 This, of course, means the payment of the wage scale in the regular labor market, which in turn has in fact been determined by collective bargaining. One further point of importance in connection with the wage policy on the government relief projects concerns the stand of the Unemployment Commission on the question of cash relief payments and the employing of men on public works during periods of industrial dispute, strikes, and lockouts. In a country with practically all occupations almost completely unionized, and with organization on the employers' side equally developed, such a question becomes a national issue. As a matter of fact, the fall of the Branting Cabinet and the first Social Demo" E. G. Huss, " T h e Organization of Public Works," of. cit., p. 37. The Discussion of all the details entering into the consideration of the Commission before determining what the actual wage rate should be is given in full in Part III of the official report of the Unemployment Commission, Det Svenska Samhallet och Arbetslosheten, Stockholm, 1929. M Arbetet, Stockholm, 21 June, 1933; Fackforeningsrorelsen, 23 June 1933 ( I Z . I . , Vol. X L V I I , No. 4, P- 166).

54

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

cratic government in Sweden was due to this problem. The question concerns not only those workers who are unemployed as a direct consequence of a strike or lockout but also those indirectly so affected. The decision of the Swedish Parliament is that "unemployed persons are deprived of their right to the State benefit whenever a general strike or a partial strike affecting general interests occurred in their occupation even if they are not concerned in the disputes." The Government, in 1923, proposed to relax the policy in view of the large numbers of unemployed due to existing strikes and lockouts, but the proposal was defeated by the Parliament.19 The more recent view of the Unemployment Commission (which has been upheld by the Finance Committee of the Parliament) essentially maintains the early parliamentary position. But the question has again been treated within the unemployment relief legislation which has been enacted in 1933. This provides that "during a labor dispute persons may not be employed on reserve (public relief) works if they are directly involved in the dispute, or if they have otherwise become unemployed on account of the dispute, and if their wages and condiw

Sociala Meddelanden, No. 4, 1923 (I.L.I., Vol. X I , No. 7, pp. 1 6 - 1 7 ) . The Premier had made it a vote of confidence and the Cabinet fell. According to the Government proposal workers were to be excluded from unemployment benefit only six months after the termination of the dispute, and further, that any unemployed person who had been out of work for more than six months before the dispute was to be entitled to benefit (or employment on public works) during the dispute. Parliament begged the question by voting that although no benefit was to be paid during strikes or lockouts, consideration should be given individual cases, at the hands of an expert.

PUBLIC WORKS

55

tions of employment may reasonably be expected to be affected by the dispute."20 5. Significance of Public Works in Sweden Having considered in the foregoing discussion the various aspects of public work which have been used as a measure of unemployment relief, we may raise the question, What has been the part and significance of public works in the whole national program of relieving unemployment? In answer to this question, it may be emphasized that although the "work principle"—rather than that of "maintenance"—is fundamental to the unemployment relief program of the Scandinavian countries, and especially so of the Swedish, it is very apparent that it has been but one part of that program. T h e statement made by the Head of the Social Board that it is only during the three periods of intense depression ( 1 9 1 4 1915, 1921-1922, 1930 on) that there has been any need for cash relief payment conveys the implication that during other times public works have been adequate as a measure of unemployment relief. This implication is not tenable. Table V I I I below is taken from the official report of the State Unemployment Commission, "Det Svenska Samhallet och Arbetslosheten 1914-1924, Berattelse Avgiven av Statens Arbetsloshetskommission."21 It can be seen during the 1921-1922 period of heavy depression that in the season of heaviest unemployment (the first " Arhetet, Stockholm, 21 June 1 9 3 3 ; Fackforeningsrorelsen, 23 June 1933 (I.L.I., V o l . X L V I I , No. 4, p. 1 6 6 ) . " p . 392. ( * cannot be determined). N o comparable figures are available to the writer for all of the other years since 1924.

56

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT T A B L E VIII U N E M P L O Y E D W O R K E R S A S S I G N E D T O PUBLIC W O R K S IN

SWEDEN,

I92I-I924 (In per cent of the total number reported to the State Unemployment Commission)

Beginning of the Quarter

1921

1922

January April

*

14.9 18.9

July October

14.2

*

18.3

47-7 53 3

1923

1924

25.9 39-S 68.1

13.2 22.9 11.1

38.7

5-2

two quarters of the year) public works failed to take care of as many as one-fifth of the total number out of work. T h a t nearly as high as 7 0 % was reached in 1923 means very little in view of the season of the year and the relatively favorable situation on the labor market. A recent report—that for M a r c h 1 9 3 2 — g i v e s the total unemployed assisted during that month as 62,195, which was but 5 6 . 7 % of the total applicants. O f these 62,195 who were assisted, 25,003 received cash relief payments from communes subsidized by the State, and an additional 7,047 received such payments from communes without state subsidy. 22 F o r the period 1930 up through the first months of 1932, it is reported that 3 3 % to 5 7 % of the unemployed registered by the communal unemployment committees were given work on public projects. 28 T h i s completes the discussion of the various aspects of "International Labour Conference, of.

cit., p. 133.

" E . G. Huss, " T h e Organization of Public W o r k s , " of. cit., p. 26.

PUBLIC WORKS

57

public works in the unemployment relief program of Sweden—their organization, selection of projects, financing, administration, wage policy, and the degree to which such works have absorbed the unemployed. W e pass now to a consideration of the place which this type of unemployment relief has had in the program of Norway and Denmark. 6. The Public Works Program in Norway and Denmark

Although not nearly as complete in its organization as in the case of Sweden, public works have, nevertheless, played an important part in the programs of Norway and Denmark and it would seem that the intention definitely is to make that part a larger one. In referring to Table IV above (p. 20) giving the unemployment relief expenditures of the national government of Norway during the years of the first period of heavy unemployment, it will be seen that of the total expenditure during 1919-1923 of 91,347,000 Kr. considerably more than half of this sum (i.e., 47,325,000 Kr. and 11,595,000 Kr.) was expended for "relief works." Even a greater proportion of the total governmental expenditure was of this type in less stringent years. A report of the Norwegian Labor Office gives the total expenditure for unemployment relief for the five years ending 1925 as being 170,000,000 Kr., of which approximately 147,000,000 Kr. were spent on public works.24 The expenditure of the communes alone which goes to public works is "I.LJVol.

XVIII, No. 2, 12 Apr. 1926.

58

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

about one-half of their total expenditures for unemployment relief. With regard to Denmark, the expenditure of the national government toward the relief of unemployment by means of public works cannot be exactly stated. Referring to Table V above (p. 2 3 ) , the total expenditure from the "Central Unemployment F u n d , " as compared with those from the "Ordinary Insurance F u n d s " and from their " E m e r g e n c y F u n d , " certainly shows a far less relative importance of such expenditure, except possibly for the years 1 9 2 2 - 1 9 2 3 and 1 9 2 6 - 1 9 2 7 . A s has been pointed out in the foregoing discussion, however, the Central U n employment F u n d serves the double purpose of paying cash relief and of supporting public and private works. T h e organization of public works f o r relieving unemployment in Denmark has in it most, if not all, of the elements present in the Swedish system; but it has, nevertheless, both ideas and structure not found in the latter. According to a communication from the Danish Government to the International Labour Office of the League of Nations, relief works may be organized in Denmark by the state, the commune, or by a private organization subsidized by the public authorities. These works must be organized for the express purpose of relieving unemployment; that is, relief projects are enterprises which would not have been undertaken at that time had there been no unemployment. T h e conditions of work must be such as to secure the employment of the largest possible number of unemployed persons, and to make it more advantageous for the unemployed to work on such relief works than

PUBLIC WORKS

59

to receive unemployment benefit, but less advantageous than to find normal work. This result may be attained either by paying a rate lower than the ordinary rate for the same kind of work in the district, or by paying the ordinary rate while reducing hours of work, or by combining both. These conditions are fixed in every case by the Minister of the Interior of Denmark on the proposal of joint regional committees of employers and workers in conformity with the following provisions: (a) if the wage paid is lower than the standard wage, the scale of wages in the case of general work must be such that an experienced worker employed for 48 hours a week will be able to earn from 45 Kr. to 50 Kr. in the country, from 50 Kr. to 60 Kr. in or near a large town, and from 60 Kr. to 72 Kr. in or near the largest cities; (b) if it is arranged that hours of work shall be less than the normal working hours, the reduction must not be less than one-third. Work of all kinds may be recognized as relief work. The fact that a project is undertaken through the medium of a private contractor does not necessarily prevent its being recognized as relief work, but the contractor must be bound by contract to comply with the regulations concerning relief work. The project which is recognized as relief work is that which is proposed by a committee consisting of a chairman, appointed by the Minister of the Interior, and two employers' and two workers' representatives chosen by the central organizations of employers and workers respectively.

6o

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

T h e control of relief works is vested in the joint committees and the communal employment exchanges. Only unemployed persons registered at the employment exchanges may be engaged, except in the case of the administrative staff. Other things being equal, preference must be given to unemployed persons who are members of a recognized unemployment insurance society, and amongst the latter, to persons with family responsibility, and to those who have been out of employment for the longest period. Grants from the Central Unemployment Fund to relief works will be proportioned to the number of days of work done, on the basis of 3 5 % of the wages paid, and with a maximum grant of 3 Kr. per day per person.25 But neither in method of consideration nor in numbers of applications have the proposals for public works developed in the Danish program to the extent that they have in Sweden, and possibly in Norway. The explanation can be found, undoubtedly, in large part in the parliamentary opposition in Denmark from the Agrarian and Conservative Parties, and indeed, also the Radical Party. A compromise measure passed in 1925 empowered the Minister of Social Affairs to grant thirty-year loans, at SlA% rate of interest (to the limited amount of 8,000,000 K r . ) to communes or private institutions in receipt of public support. H e was also authorized to extend not more than 2 0 % of the cost of materials for unemployment relief works, if such works were started before June 1 , 1926, and provided further that such materials were of Danish * I.L.I., Vol. I, No. io, 10 March 1922, pp. 32-34.

PUBLIC WORKS

6i

origin and manufacture.26 Emergency proposals in the deflation crisis in November of that year would have extended loans, and guarantee of loans, to industrial undertakings as well as direct subsidies to industries. T h e result was defeat of the proposal and the fall of the Government. Unemployment relief, therefore, has fallen much more heavily upon unemployment insurance funds since 1925-1926 as Table V clearly shows, whereas the expenditure from the Central Unemployment Fund has rapidly decreased from 1926-1927 on. Finally, an interesting phase of public works in the relief of unemployment is incorporated in legislation which was enacted in the summer of 1933 in Denmark and also in Sweden. It concerns "voluntary labor service." It is frankly regarded as experimental in both countries. As a part of the Danish Act of May 20, 1933, a parliamentary credit of 3,000,000 Kr. is to be used as a subsidy toward the cost of providing work for young persons from eighteen to twenty-two years of age for the period up to March 31, 1934. T h e "voluntary labor services" covered by the Act include manual work and educational activities. The decision in regard to the admission of young persons devolves upon the National Director of Labor. Applications are to be addressed to employment exchanges. It is the plan that groups of twenty to fifty persons are to be formed for two to four months service, being given free board and lodging, a small allowance in cash, but no right to unemployment benefit payments. The groups may be organized by local authorities, various private associations, " I.L.I., Vol. XVI, No. 13, 28 December 191J, p. 17.

62

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

trade unions, and other bodies. A special national committee is to be constituted of representatives of employers, of workers, and of the Parliament, with a chairman appointed by the Minister of Social Affairs. T h i s committee is charged with the examination of the program of work submitted by prospective organizations of voluntary labor service to see that there does not ensue any detrimental influence to the private labor market. Applications for subsidies to the Minister of Social Affairs which are granted are allowed 2 K r . a day per person. Two-thirds of the cost is to be borne by the State, and one-third by the local authority concerned. 27 This, then, has been the experience of the Scandinavian countries with public works in their programs of relieving unemployment. In the length of time over which that experience has extended and in the continuity with which the public works program has been utilized, Scandinavia (and more especially, Sweden) furnishes a case study in the field of unemployment relief that in some respects stands alone. T h e Swedish experience is particularly useful in providing an unbroken experiment during the whole of the post-war period, under the direction of its National Unemployment Commission (Statens missionen),

Arbetsloshetskom-

appointed in 1914. W e have in the work of

this Commission two decades of activity in that special field of unemployment relief toward which our own G o v ernment is now turning in the functioning of the Public " Sociolt

Tidskrift,

Copenhagen, M a y 1933 (I.L.I.,

V o l . X L V I I , N o . 4,

p. 1 6 5 ) . Concerning- the Swedish plan see Fackforeningsrorelsen,

1933-

23 June

PUBLIC WORKS

63

Works Administration and the Civil Works Administration. During the course of the last twenty-year period, the public works venture as a governmental measure in the alleviation of unemployment has been given thorough testing by the Government of Sweden. The numerous problems of organization and administration have been briefly examined in this chapter. The appraisal of public works, as well as of the other measures in the coordinated program of unemployment relief, is to be considered in the following chapters. It is to this we shall turn in Part I I .

PART II U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E L I E F IN T H E SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES: APPRAISAL

V T H E WORKERS' V I E W P O I N T

H

AVING now considered the organization and administration of unemployment relief in the Scandinavian countries, we come to an appraisal of the program which these countries have supported. It has been pointed out in the foregoing chapters that that program has been a threefold one which coordinates cash or direct relief, unemployment insurance, and public works. Sufficient time has now elapsed in the pursuit of this coordinated plan to make it possible to assess the results which have been achieved. This is especially true in view of the factors in the Scandinavian social economic structure to which reference has been made above. In the first place the sensitiveness of Scandinavian Social Democracy, the comparative political stability, and the approach to "laboratory control" made possible by a smaller national economic area have defined and clarified social action and reaction. In the second place, the social unemployment relief program, antedating the post-war years, has in the last twenty years undergone three severe test periods of unemployment. And in the third place, possibly the most significant of the factors in the Scandinavian social economic situation is the pronounced articulateness of the social groups —in large part accounted for by the high degree of or67

68

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

ganization of the workers on the one side and of the employers on the other—in expressing their judgment upon the efforts which have been directed at what has constituted the foremost national problem, namely, that of relieving the unemployment situation. T h e social groups which are primarily and directly concerned in a social program of relieving unemployment are obviously the workers, the employers, and the governmental administrations. An appraisal of the unemployment relief program must be an examination of the position taken by each of these three social groups relative to that relief program. W e shall consider, therefore, the workers' viewpoint in this chapter. The employers' attitude and the Government's position will be treated in the chapters to follow. i. The Swedish Workers* Criticism of the Public Works Program T h e discussion, by the workers in the Scandinavian countries, of the efforts made on the part of their Governments toward meeting the social problem presented by unemployment has centered upon two parts of the whole program. These two are public works and unemployment insurance. Fortunately that discussion has been very extensive and throws much light on the principles and practice of unemployment relief work. It was pointed out above that public works for the relief of the unemployed and also advanced planning of governmental projects has had, in Scandinavia, its greatest development in Sweden under the continuous operations of

T H E WORKERS'

VIEWPOINT

69

the State Unemployment Commission. W e may, therefore, turn to the critical and exhaustive treatment of the subject by the workers' organizations of Sweden as being grounded upon an unusual first-hand knowledge. In obtaining the workers' appraisal of public works after two decades of experience, it is exceedingly helpful to have the report of a parliamentary committee, published in 1933. This report, entitled "Concerning Public Works as a Means of Counteracting Unemployment" (Angaende Bereiskafsarbeten till Motverkande av Arbetsldshe?), was prepared under the chairmanship of Mr. Sigfrid Hansson, who for many years has been the leader of the national labor center (Landsorganisationen) and the editor of its official organ, Fackjoreningsrorelsen. This publication presents a thoughtful discussion of the function of public works in relieving unemployment, by the foremost spokesman of labor in the Scandinavian countries. The foregoing discussion has described the principles and practice of the public works program since its inauguration in Sweden. As has been stated, although this type of relief antedates the establishment of the National Unemployment Commission in 1914, public works have been dominated by that Commission since its appointment. It follows, therefore, that from the workers' point of view public works as a measure of unemployment relief have become identified with the Commission and the policy which it has followed. It is necessary, for this reason, to restate briefly and to keep before one the policy and the principles which have guided the functioning of the Com1

Kunglia Boktryckeriet, P. A. Norstedt och Sorter, (Stockholm, 1933)-

70

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

mission, and through it the operation of the public projects themselves. Only in so doing can the basis and the nature of the workers' viewpoint, relative to the unemployment relief program, be understood, inasmuch as the workers' criticisms are directly related to the policy and these principles to which we refer. T h e policy of the Swedish Government has been to have the responsibility for relief measures rest with the local authorities, but to vest the National Unemployment Commission with general powers of direction and control of the public works undertaken to support provincial relief measures which the local authorities themselves could not undertake. The principles which have guided that Commission, we have seen, are that the projects selected must be of such a character as to be in the public interest and to involve as their principal cost that of labor; that the enterprise must be of a type suitable for all workers (manual as well as skilled); and that the work must be of such a kind as not to preclude the possibility, when improvement in the labor market occurs, of discontinuing the project at any time. Consistent with these principles, projects have been undertaken, by the State alone (statliga nodhjalpsarbetena), by the collaboration of the State and the commune, and by advance planning and operation of the type of work which would normally be undertaken at a later date by the various governmental departments ( beredskafsarbeten). One further point of principle established by the National Unemployment Commission must be kept in mind as also fundamental in interpreting the viewpoint of labor. It is this—the wage policy to be fol-

T H E WORKERS' VIEWPOINT

7i

lowed on public works should be so adjusted that wages on such works would be higher than the cash relief payments granted, but lower than the wages of unskilled labor on the open labor market. A n analysis of the views expressed by workers and their leaders shows very clearly that each of the principles which have guided the Commission is challenged and held to be untenable. W e shall first consider the one we have mentioned last, and that is the principle governing the wage policy of the Commission, since it has been the one on which the workers have centered their discussion from the very beginning of the Government's post-war public works program, and it has undoubtedly been the paramount issue in the whole public works program. In the official report of the Unemployment Commission, which covers the first ten years of its work, it asserts that this policy has "in a high measure accounted for the fact that the gigantic unemployment in Sweden has been reduced to normal proportions faster than in most of the European countries," and the Commission held implicitly, if not explicitly, that such a policy was obviously sound. 2 T h e workers' view is diametrically opposed to this. F u r thermore such a position is not held by the Swedish workers alone, who might be regarded as unfavorably biased, for one reason or another, to the system as a whole. A s evidence of this the statement of the Danish Confederation of T r a d e Unions is in point. In 1 9 2 1 , when the Danish Parliament was considering the revision of its Unemploy' Statens Arbetsloshetskommission, Del Svenska Samhallet och Arbetslosheten 1914-1924, (Stockholm 1929), p. 203.

72

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

ment Act of 1 9 1 9 and replacing its system of unemployment insurance under that Act by the Swedish plan of public works, the Danish Confederation insisted that " T h e proposed right to commence relief works at reduced rates is a blow to workers' organizations and their members, and its only object would be to destroy the wage scales and agreements which for more than a lifetime have been built up by the efforts of the organizations." 8 This statement of the Danish Confederation points to one of the two sources of opposition to the wage policy. T h e one source of opposition is the worker as a union memberj and the second source is the worker as an individual. The former, that is the union case, holds that the requirement made by the Swedish Unemployment Commission that the unemployed must accept a wage offered him lower than the wage he has secured by collective agreement in the open market when employed, means turning over to the government authorities the question of wage policy.4 Organized labor further maintains that such a policy must in the nature of the case be support to the employers in breaking down wage rates in the open market. The workers assert that if cash relief were paid to the unemployed, and the workers were not required to accept public work, their bargaining strength would not have been prejudiced by having accepted lower wage rates and also having suffered disorganization inherent " Arbejderen, 22, 29 Nov. 1 9 1 1 (International Labour Office, Daily Intelligence. Vol. IV, No. 36, p. 22). * P.M. Angdende Beredskafsarbeten till motverkande av arbetsloshet, p. 27.

T H E WORKERS' VIEWPOINT

73

in working on government projects. Or, as the Confederation of Trade Unions in Norway has put it in its criticism of public relief works, when government works are given the special character of "relief works" such public projects may be used as a means of lowering wages and the standard of living of the worker. 5 T h e opposition to the wage policy from the worker as an individual arises from two sources. T h e first concerns that psychological-economic problem as to what differential should be kept between the cash relief benefit and the public works wage. T h e cash relief benefit amounts to that which is necessary for subsistence, and the public works wage (being determined by the lowest wage paid to manual labor, 6 ) comes—or can if the Commission wishes to determine that such really is the "lowest w a g e " — t o nearly the same thing. A n d this first source of opposition from the individual connects itself closely to that of the second, namely, the test of "willingness to work." This test we have seen is accomplished by the offer of work on public projects, and refusal to accept the work means "unwillingness" and automatically terminates cash benefit payments. In the worker's judgment this does not constitute a test of willingness to work; no choice is involved, it amounts to a threat. On the basis of this reasoning by the workers concerning the principle of wage payment on public works we may turn to the demands which they have made through their spokesmen in the Riksdag. These demands must be ' Arbciierbladet, 5 May 1931 {IX..I., * Cf. Chapter IV, above.

Vol. X X X V I I I , No. 10, p. 364).

SCANDINAVIAN U N E M P L O Y M E N T

74

regarded as those of maturity and significance, inasmuch as they are based upon many years of experience with public works as a relief measure, as well as on the agitation to which this relief measure has given rise. T h e following points are now advanced. First, that public works should apply the labor-market wage rates and other provisions as reflected in collective agreements, or such wages as are common to the locality. 7 T w o arguments are advanced in support of this demand. T h e

representatives

of labor point to the fact that the National Social Board stated that in 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 there were 5 , 2 8 8 collective agreements drawn up which included 2 5 , 8 1 9 employers and 6 1 8 , 0 3 4 workers. In fact, in public projects such agreements dominate work done by municipalities and highway districts. 8 T h e workers further assert that one advantage 7

Angaende Beredskafsarbeten, op. cit., pp. 3, 36. This demand made by the parliamentary committee was also recommended in the report of another committee in 1 9 3 0 ( C f . , the two Government publications: Statens Ofientliga Utredningar, Socialdepartementet 1931: "Betankande med for slag angaende arbetsloshetens motverkande genom beredskafsarbeten" and Social Departementet, 3 Dec. 193 2, "1932 Ars Utredning Angaende Beredskafsarbeten." F o r Denmark it would be particularly easy low the wage policy called f o r here by the Danish Conciliation Act of 1922 authorized from all organizations—both workers and of the collective agreements to be filed in the

for the Government to folSwedish workers, since the the Government to demand employers—complete copies Government office.

'Ibid., pp. 35-36. T h e rate of growth of collective agreements (kollektivavtalen), even in work of a public character, is indicated by the fact that 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 highway Work carried on by governmental authorities involved 168 such agreements, including 7,244 workers, whereas ten years previous to this only one such agreement existed which included twenty workers. (See also my discussion "Collective Agreements," Appendix B, pp. 1 5 7 - 1 5 8 . )

T H E WORKERS'

VIEWPOINT

75

of accepting collective agreements as a basis of wage determination, rather than the policy followed by the National Unemployment Commission, is that the State would know its cost and budgetary requirements before the project is undertaken, not to mention the reduced probability of industrial disturbances. T h e second demand made by the workers concerns the matter of the wage policy in times of conflict. Here the workers' claim is equally definite, in contradistinction to the wavering practice of the Government during the past years. In the event of a conflict in which it is proven that the blame is on the side of the employer, the workers involved should have a right to turn to the labor exchanges for work with another government project. 9 T h e third demand is that the state relief works secure workers through the use of the public labor exchanges according to the needs (skill) dictated by the nature of the project. T h e only exception to this practice should be in the case of such specially trained workers as may be required. Then the length of * Ibid., p. 36. The rule of the State Unemployment Commission, against which this demand is directed, is that in the case of a general conflict the State's works would close (within that trade) and all the workers in the country in that trade in their respective communities are shut off from State relief aid regardless of the cause or source of the conflict. A s can readily be seen, this in practice would give rise to much difficulty, especially when—as usually is the case—territorial or local conflicts develop and workers in other parts of the country were not participating in any way (except, of course, directly or indirectly assisting in strike support). The Commission in support of its practice would assert that it must necessarily follow this rule inasmuch as granting unemployment relief to workers anywhere who could take the work of those who had quit would be if so facto support to the workers' side of the conflict.

76

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

time the worker has been unemployed should be considered. 10 So much for the present position of the workers concerning one of the four basic principles enumerated above as those which the Swedish Unemployment Commission has followed in the public works part of the unemployment relief program. We turn now to another of the principles which has guided the Commission, namely, that the work selected as a public project must be in the public interest, involving as its chief cost that of labor. Closely allied to this is another principle to which the Commission has adhered and which may be considered at the same time, namely, that the work should be of the sort as to be suitable for all labor. This in practice has meant that the Commission's projects did not include those calling, to any important degree, for skilled work inasmuch as such work would preclude the possibility of manual labor qualifying. On the application of these principles to public works (at least as the Commission has construed them), the spokesmen of labor take sharp exception. Referring to the report of the parliamentary committee appointed in 1930 which recommended that public works should be carried on in addition to those undertaken by the State Unemployment Commission, the committee that year in its report made the proposal to the Parliament that not only should government works be extended, but also that 10 Ibid-., pp. 33-34. Apparently what the parliamentary committee has in mind—although it is not made clear in their report—is to decrease the supervisory activities of the local unemployment committees.

T H E WORKERS' VIEWPOINT

77

they should replace those carried on by the Unemployment Commission. In supporting this recommendation they pointed to the findings of the committee created by the Parliament on December 3, 1932, which was charged with rendering an inventory of possible governmental projects that could be undertaken to relieve unemployment. 11 Table I X , below, gives a summary of their estimates. TABLE IX INVENTORY

BY THE SWEDISH GOVERNMENT OF A V A I L A B L E WORK PROJECTS I N R E L I E F O F

Group B (Those Possible in a Plan over Several Years)

Type of Project

Group A (Those Immediately Available)

State State-commune.. . Commune Privat«

43,61s,004 Kr. 117,230,718 " 33,151,862 " 11,762,794 "

193.55I.9I5 56,706,114 23,804,060

" " "

205,760,418

320,696,177

"

Total cost

"

FOR

PUBLIC

UNEMPLOYMENT

Group C (Others—Information Inadequate)

46,634,058 Kr. — — —

108,199,932 Kr.

Source: P.M. Angàende Beredskapsarbeten till Motverkande av Arbetslöshet, p. 13

T h e tremendous degree to which government projects can be extended according to the totals in the above inventory, as compared with the size of those projects which have been carried on under the administration of the State Unemployment Commission, can be realized when w e take the total cost of the projects that were under way in u

Staiens Ojfentliga

Utredningar, Socialdefartementet

1931:

3, of.

cit.

78

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

1932. This, according to the Head of the Social Board, amounted to 41,618,000 Kr., 6,550,000 Kr., and 2,580,000 Kr. respectively for state, state-commune, and so-called "relief-works" (beredskafsarbeten), 12 Moreover, "The widened sphere now contemplated would involve the modifying of the purpose and suitability of public works." This modification includes not only a change quantitatively but also a significant emphasis upon the use of public loans to private enterprises, which according to the table above would take an appreciably greater rate of increase than the other types of projects.13 "From now on private industries which are of a general character, together with state and provincial works should be considered relief work," and this requires that the Unemployment Commission shall give up the authority to judge the suitability of work for relief purposes.14 And in toto this reasoning is a complete denial of the principle and practice to which the Unemployment Commission has adhered—that of restricting their support to public works projects, which call largely for a labor cost and that labor to be of a manual sort. The demand of labor leaders is for completely " C f . , E. G. Huss, "Organization of Public Works," op. cit., pp. 46-48. " It is a curious inconsistency for those who profess to the socialist ideals to argue for the support of private enterprises. In fact to those who do not understand the Scandinavian social, economic point of view, much of the reasoning of those who are active Social Democrats would seem inconsistent, for it does not harmonize with the theory of socialism. In my opinion the social, economic point of view in the Scandinavian countries is essentially collectivism of a sort to be sharply distinguished from conventional socialism—and one proof of this is that socialism as a dogma holds hardly any interest for the Scandinavian working masses, nor their leaders. (Cf. what is said in Appendix B , below, pp. 1 5 4 - 1 5 7 . ) u

Angaende

Bereiskafsarbeten,

of.

cit., pp.

19-21.

T H E WORKERS' VIEWPOINT

79

diversified public works, offering opportunities for skilled as well as unskilled, selected through the regular public labor exchanges, and paid at wage rates on the collective agreement base. T o come now to the workers' appraisal of the other basic principle which—as has been stated above—has, through the agency of the State Unemployment Commission, governed the procedure of public relief projects, namely, that the public works should be of such a sort as not to preclude the possibility of discontinuing operations if improvement occurred in the open labor market. In appraising this phase of the Commission's work it is agreed by labor that an "elasticity" in the Government works system has existed, due to the right of the Commission to discontinue operations when it thinks desirable in light of the industrial situation, and the further right to require the other party to the work's contract to complete the task. While this kind of elasticity is, to a certain degree, advantageous, "this alone should not have determining power, but economic and technical points of view" should have weight. It is argued also that public works up to the present time have been "of an experimental sort, and, as such, of little consequence." Conversely, the parliamentary committee in its report in 1 9 3 3 (which represents the view of organized labor) holds that advanced planning of government relief works "would have a not unimportant influence upon the cyclical situation" of unemployment. In fact, the policy followed by the Commission of discontinuing work at any time is opposed to the principle which should govern public work in gen-

8o

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

eral, that is, that the projects should be the most desirable ones, and their cost, when completed, should not exceed that which would have been the case if carried out in the usual manner. T h e smaller projects should be utilized by the government for seasonal unemployment, and by careful timing of origin and tempo of work on such undertakings this could be accomplished. Larger projects, to be carried out in stages, should be able to be utilized successfully in counteracting cyclical unemployment. 15 This has been the appraisal by Swedish labor of the principles upon which the government unemployment relief works have been grounded. The attitude of labor on one other important aspect of these works commands attention. That concerns the question of the Government's method of organization and administration of projects. It has been seen that the initiative for government relief enterprises came from the local authorities or from the Unemployment Commission. With the Commission, however, rested full authority for approval or rejection in any case. The parliamentary committee in 1 9 3 3 suggested a decided and significant change. In the Department of Social Affairs, it was argued that a board should be established composed of five officials, representing employers, workers, the State Unemployment Commission, economic science, and the central governmental departments. T h e administrative authority for carrying through the project —at present centralized in the Commission—under the proposal made would go into the hands of the appropriate " Angaende

Beredskafsarbeten,

of.

cit., pp. 24.-26.

T H E WORKERS' VIEWPOINT

81

government departments and be carried out as government works normally pursued.16 Curiously enough this argument of the representatives of organized workers for delimiting the powerful State Unemployment Commission to a subordinate advisory capacity is not founded on the points which an American would naturally expect, namely, "bureaucracy" and "expense" of a government board. Possibly this can be explained in the light of what has been seen to be true with regard to the distribution of cost in public works. For 1930-31, Director-General Huss of the Department of Social Affairs gave the entire cost of the central administration as less than 5% of the total expenditures of the Unemployment Commission.17 Rather, the basis of the reasoning which has been presented above is the remarkably broad conception that "the principal function of 'public relief works' (beredskapsanordningen) should not be regarded as a form of relief to the unemployed . . . but as a rationalization measure within public activities."18 That M

Ibid., pp. 40, 43. " See note 5, Chapter IV, pp. 44-4J. " I am translating literally from the parliamentary report. The true connotation of the phrase "en rationaliseringsátgard inom den statliga verksamheten" is only approximately rendered by my statement above. We have no adequate English equivalent for the German term "rationalisierungsbeiuegung" (and the Swedish "rationaliseringsátgard") which are used in a very much broader sense than our English word "rationalization" or our American term "scientific management" out of which the German terminology developed. The German term (see e. g., H. Hinnethal, Die deutsche Rationalisierungsbevxgung) is used from both a national and a private economic point of view, and probably more often the former than the latter. A concise discussion of the concept of rationalization is given by Professor Gustav Ákerman, in his very illuminating study, made for the Swedish Government, "Industrial Rationalization and its

82

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

is to say, one of the important means which the government should employ in counteracting those conditions which create cyclical unemployment is that of public works. But more than this, public works should be utilized as a means of balancing general governmental activities, which are not—and possibly in the nature of the case cannot be —"rationalized," with industrial activities which, conversely, have an increasingly rapid rate of "rationalization." That this was not, and is not, considered by the State Unemployment Commission in its administration of public worts is the cause of the assertion that "these works have been of no great value in relation to the labor market or to national economy." 19 That the labor leaders feel that unemployment relief must be conceived as a much broader problem than it has heretofore been regarded is seen in a particularly provocative proposal—and one, to my knowledge, quite original in its statement—for the public control of industrial rationalization in Sweden made in the Riksdag in 1933. A resolution was introduced calling for the Government to investigate the methods whereby, and the extent to which, public control of measures of industrial rationalization could be effected. It was argued that since rationalization measures in industry compel the community to bear certain financial burdens, the community should have some voice in the introduction of such measures. For this results," (Orn den Industriella rationaliseringen och dess Verkningar, Statens Offentliga Vtredningar 1931: 42, Socialdefartementet, Arbetsloshetsutredningem Betankande /, Stockholm 1931). " Angdende

Beredskafsarbeten,

of.

cit., p. 24.

T H E WORKERS' VIEWPOINT

83

purpose collaboration between private undertakings, local authorities, and the State should be brought about. The resolution suggested the imposition of a special tax on industry, the proceeds of which would be used in cases where reorganization due to rationalization caused social distress. It further proposed the creation of a state authority which, for example, might make the transfer of an undertaking from a locality which might be seriously affected conditional on the company granting compensation to the locality.20 Such is the evaluation of the leaders of organized labor on the Swedish experience with that part of the unemployment relief program which relates to public works. There has been a denial of the validity of all the principles and policy of the National Unemployment Commission and also the charge that the program of government work has not been based upon a sufficiently broad conception of its real function. We shall now consider the workers' position relative to the place of unemployment insurance in the social program of relief. 2. The Scandinavian Workers' View of Unemployment Insurance In the discussion of unemployment insurance, it has been explained that such insurance, under a voluntary plan, had been established in Norway and Denmark, but that so far as this type of relief had developed in Sweden "Fackforeningsrorelsen, 359-360).

3 Feb. 1933 (I.L.I.,

Vol. XLV, No. 13, pp.

84

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

it was maintained by the trade unions without governmental support. As was stated in that connection, this sort of relief to the unemployed has remained a very open question in Norway and Sweden (although not in Denmark) after many years of controversy. 21 Nevertheless the extensive agitation and investigation which have gone on continuously in more recent years have been productive of defining views and issues. In Sweden this seems especially to be the case. W e have seen that the question came before the Riksdag in 1933 for vote, with the result that the Government's proposal for a state-subsidized unemployment insurance act failed by a close vote in the First Chamber although it was passed by the Second Chamber. In view of the position taken by organized labor in Sweden on the question of public works, it is clear that powerful agitation will continue for the introduction of state unemployment insurance, which would shift from the workers the sole responsibility of this type of relief that has already necessitated the payment by the unions to their members of the very large 21 The first motion in the Swedish Parliament concerning' it came in 1908. In 1 9 1 2 the Parliament decided to request the Government to start an inquiry into the whole matter. After the War, the Government requested the Social Insurance Commission to consider what measures could be taken by the public authorities. In December 1922 the Commission in its report suggested state grants to voluntary unemployment funds set up by the workers themselves. In accordance with prevailing usage the recommendations of the Commission had to be submitted to several authorities and organizations. In the 1923 session of the Parliament the Government fell on the question of the use of the powers granted it by the Parliament to deal with the unemployment crisis. Thus the question was shelved. C/., Fackforeningsrorelsen, Nos. 9, 1 2 , 1 9 2 4 ( l . L . I . , Vol. X , No. 9, pp. 1 7 - 1 8 ) .

T H E WORKERS' VIEWPOINT

85

sum of 41,576,208 Kr. in the period from 1899 through 1931.22

A parallel situation has developed in Norway with reference to the efforts of workers to secure compulsory unemployment insurance rather than the voluntary type that they have had since 1906. But the workers in defending their criticism of the unemployment relief problem have grounded their demands upon totally different reasoning from that of organized labor in Sweden.23 In the minority report of the Unemployment Committee of Norway, appointed by the Ministry of Social Affairs, presenting the views of labor and publishing its findings in 1932, unemployment was held to require for its solution a "social plan in production, exchange, and distribution of economic goods." Among other demands, consistent with this point of view, compulsory unemployment insurance is called for, together with a guarantee by state and local authorities of "adequate" maintenance to the unemployed.24 " Svenska Dagbladet, 8 Oct. 1932 (I.L.I., Vol. X L I V , No. 4, pp. 1 1 3 1 4 ) . The official organ of Swedish Employers' Federation, Industria, reports that at the 1932 congress of the Swedish Confederation of Trade Unions it was decided to make a 250,000 Kr. grant by that Confederation to the Social Democratic Party for the purpose of pushing through government unemployment insurance (Industria, Jrgang X X V I I I , No. 20, 23 Sept. 1932, p. 490). " The very notable difference in the social outlook of these two national groups of workers presents an intriguing problem to the sociologist. Tiie tendency of Norwegian unions to swing to the left, and their critical attitude toward the International Federation of Trade Unions and the International Labour Office are characteristics of the Norwegian labor movement for which I have been unable to find any adequate explanation. M Arbeiderbladet, 16 March 1932 (I.L.I., Vol. X L I I , No. 3, pp. 87-88).

VI T H E EMPLOYERS'

ATTITUDE

T

H E Scandinavian employers' appraisal of the coordinated, three-fold program of relief carried on by

their respective governments is undoubtedly influenced by

the general acceptance, in those countries, of collectivism in the social economic structure. This is made evident, among other ways, in the complete recognition of collective agreements (kollektivavtal) in the labor market, and an extensive and broadening industrial function of the government. In this social point of view the employers, to a greater or less degree, fully share.1 It is not to be 1

T o an American (at least until our recent habituation to the "Blue Eagle" and the National Recovery methods) it is particularly striking to note to what extent there is in those countries an unquestioned conviction that the government should do not the least, but rather the most it can in the field which we in this country have traditionally regarded as the field of individual enterprise, whether that is constructing garden-city dwellings, or buying the products or the shares of industrial companies. As a case in point, in Sweden may be seen the enactment of the bill in the 1931 session of the Riksdag which provided 3,000,000 Kr. for the acceleration of public works, an appropriation of 2,000,000 Kr. for the purchase of shares in the Kalix Timber Co., as well as 3,500,000 Kr. for the purchase of paving stones from companies particularly pressed in that industry. And still, curiously enough, there is no particular interest (as I have pointed out above) in socialism, per se, but there is, rather, a critical questioning by the Swedish masses of the social gains from that which typifies American industrial life, namely, larger scale production, aggressive advertising ("reklam"!), increased output, etc. Sweden illus86

THE EMPLOYERS' ATTITUDE

»7

understood, however, that there has been an uncritical approval and support by the employers in the public relief activities, but rather that the fundamental approach to the whole problem by means of a coordinated, centralized method is one in keeping with the whole social milieu. 1. Union Wage Policy and Public Works One of the basic criticisms of the employers concerning the entire post-war period of unemployment relief is seen in the statement by Professor Heckscher in Industrial the official organ of the Swedish Employers' Federation (Svenska A rbetsgivarfdreningen), in which he explains that since 1919 wages in Sweden had increased 40%} and in relation to the price level the increase has been even greater. The resulting burden on industry has necessarily caused unemployment even when allowing for the degree of technical improvement and increased productivity of the workers which have taken place in the years since the War. The labor unions have, he claims, merely chosen to hold up the wage level, with the consequence of a smaller or larger part of their numbers being unemployed.2 For this statement Dr. Heckscher has support in trates precisely what Professor F. H. Knight has so very aptly put in the following words: "There is more willingness [since the World W a r ] to envisage a world presenting less 'progress' toward goals which seem dubious, and a lower rate of consumption of 'goods and services' whose connection with goodness and serviceability is not always clear." ("Economic Psychology and the Value Problem," Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. X X X I X (1924-25), pp. 372-4.10, (Cp. also Appendix B, below). Industria, Argang XXVIII, No. 22, 21 Oct. 1932, pp. 536-537. (This

88

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

the studies of the International Labour Office, which give the increase in money wages in Sweden f r o m pre-war time up to 1930 as equal to 1 8 4 % , on the hourly basis, and an increase of 1 3 8 % , on the weekly basis, as compared with a 1 2 7 % increase in wages in the United States from pre-war times down to the second quarter of 1931. 3 T h e employers' criticism is also more specific and direct than the general charge that trade unions have prevented the wage level from falling simultaneously and equally with the price level. T h e employers maintain that the wages paid on public relief works are distinctly above the earnings of workers in agriculture, if not in industry. I t is insisted that the general instructions issued by the Government and by the Parliament have not been adhered to with respect to wages paid for relief employment. T h e principle which has been adopted by the U n employment Commission, namely, that there should be a differential between wages in the open market and on relief works, is ignored. T h e employers point out that since most of the public works are in rural, rather than urban communities, agricultural wages must be taken as the maximum in fixing wages on public enterprises if the principle laid down by the Parliament is to be observed. It is also pointed out that workers on these enterprises argument was first made with emphasis by Professor Henry C l a y concerning' the policy of English unions in the post-war period.) " Industria, Argang X X V I I I , No. 4, Feb. 12, 1932, p. 80. T h e increase in real wages f o r this period, Heckscher points out, was 5 6 % per hour and 2 7 % per week for the United States (that is at the 4th quarter of 1930) and for Sweden the increase was 7 7 % per hour, and 4 8 % per day.

THE EMPLOYERS' ATTITUDE

89

were, and are, employed to a great extent on piecework which enabled them to earn from 7 Kr. to 9 Kr. a day, whereas agricultural workers earned, during the same period, but 5.40 Kr. per day.4 This was the view of the Employers' Federation in 1921. It asserted, furthermore, that this wage policy has produced the very situation which it was intended to avoid, that is, government relief works competing with the open market and drawing labor from that market. With the very great increase in the numbers of unemployed during the last few years of severe depression, nothing has been said by the employers concerning the element of public and private competition in the labor market. T h e criticism regarding wage rates has, however, remained. In 1932 the Unemployment Commission raised the wages in about 250 of the places carrying on relief work. This, the employers point out, was done against the protest of the Director of the Commission, Mr. E. W . Paues. T h e Commission upon examination had found that agricultural and forestry wages during these years had fallen sharply, and also that many industrial plants had closed down.® T h e explanation for the wage increase on relief work was undoubtedly to be found in the fact that the Government had gone into the hands of the Social Democratic Party. This is the basis of the employers' opposition to the Government's unemployment relief program so far as it concerns the wage scale on public works. In general that * Industria, Argang X V I I , No. 24., 15 Nov. 1 9 2 1 . * Industria, Jrgang X X V I I I , No. 24, 18 Nov. 1932.

90

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

wage scale has become one which takes as its base the going (i.e., the collective agreement) w a g e — a wage policy on which, as we have seen, the workers focus their efforts. It is clear, of course, that Heckscher's argument and the employers' criticism, discussed above, would also lead to outright opposition to governmentally subsidized unemployment insurance as likewise being a means by which organized labor receives support to continue a fallacious wage policy, and hence retards the movement of the economic structure to its place in the domestic and international equilibria. W i t h reference to the operation of public relief works, we have seen that they introduce the element of public competition with private employers in bidding for labor in the open market if the wage scales in both fields approximate the same level for work which is essentially similar in quality or difficulty. Obviously the employers are adversely affected according to the extent that public enterprises draw unemployed workers from the normal openlabor market. If such works do have this influence, then in times of rapid expansion of production, of a seasonal or other character, employers would be at a disadvantage; and even if such is not the influence, in times of collective bargaining the ever-present possibility of workers turning to public works reduces the employers' bargaining strength. This again is Heckscher's point of view, but in addition he asserts that the beneficial aspects of public projects have often been exaggerated for two reasons, namely, that they tend to create a body of professional relief workers and that the practical possibility of extend-

THE EMPLOYERS' ATTITUDE

91

ing relief works is open to much question owing to the demand of the trade unions that such works be at the rates of wages and under conditions prevailing in the open market.8 2. Influence of Public Works on Workers The assertion made by Heckscher that public relief works tend to create a body of professional relief workers raises another basic problem, that of the extent to which governmental enterprises for the unemployed demoralize not the labor market per se, but the individual workers. This is a frequent criticism, not only of employers but of the general public, and deserves careful attention. Needless to say the question has constantly been raised by the critics of the public works program in the United States. Unfortunately no adequate statistical examination of this factor can be made. The two approximations which may be suggested as measurements of the demoralization of the worker through the operation of public works are: first, the length of time the worker remains on a government project before he reestablishes himself in the normal competitive labor market j and, second, the extent to which workers tend to return to public enterprises for employment. The Swedish experience with its public works program unfortunately furnishes scarcely any evidence on either of these points. It is a curious fact that the voluminous report of the State Unemployment Commission gives no material concerning this fundamental issue. One finds */.!./., Vol. XXVI, No. 12, 18 June 1918, pp. 457-58.

92

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

merely the statement: " A s a consequence of technical difficulties and also of the expense involved, it has been impossible to make a searching investigation concerning the length of time during which the individual workers have had employment—either intermittently or continually—with the state relief projects." 7 There is reported, however, in the official report the outcome of a special investigation undertaken in the autumn of 1 9 2 3 covering some of the state enterprises in the southern portion of the country. T h e following table gives the results of this investigation: TABLE X DURATION

OF

EMPLOYMENT

ON

MENT RELIEF

Length of Time Employed

y i yr. or less yi " — 1 y 1 " —2 yrs 2 yrs. or more

SWEDISH

UNEMPLOY-

PROJECTS

Number of Workers

Per Cent of Total

1,180 1,036 1,090 267

48 23 23 6

Source: Statcns Arbetsloshetskommission, Del Svensia Samhàilct och Arbctslòsheten, p. 401. '

W h i l e this evidence is very incomplete, the essential facts indicated seem to be borne out by similar estimates in the northern part of Sweden. It might further be added that the reply made by the Secretary of the Commission to 7 Statcns Arbeteloshetskommission, lòsheten, 1914-24, p. 401.

Del Svenska Sam halle t och

Arbets-

T H E

EMPLOYERS'

93

ATTITUDE

my direct question on the subject was that a very small percentage of the workers on public relief projects were "repeaters." It would seem, therefore, from such evidence as is now available that the employers' criticism of public works as tending toward the demoralization of the workers and the creation of a body of "professional relief workers" cannot be substantiated—nor in fact can it be refuted. One further point in the Swedish employers' criticism on the public works program in relief of unemployment concerns that which has very recently been propounded by labor (as we have seen in the discussion of Chapter V ) to the effect that public work, under careful planning, should be utilized as a means of "rationalization." 8 T h e 1931 report of the committee of experts of the Riksdag 9 had given this its support in its recommendations. Opinions were expressed on this report by the Employers' Federation, the Federation of Swedish Industries, and also by various chambers of commerce. They held that a system of advanced public works on which open-market wage rates were paid, if organized side by side with the existing public relief works—where lower rates were p a i d — would meet with such difficulties that they would be im* The

thought

is that

the only

works (beredskafsarbeten) would

these special

public

differ from the ordinary public

respect

in

which

works

is that they would be taken in hand in advance of the real unemployment needs, with a view to counteracting unemployment. T h e w a g e s and other conditions of work prevailing in the open market would a p p l y and also the fact that the workers would be required to possess the requisite skill. * Socuddefartementet loshets

motverkande

1931: genom

3 "Betankande

med forslag

beredskafsarbeten."

angaende

arbets-

94

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT 10

practical. Also since the proposed government works would employ only workers with the necessary skill it would mean that benefit would be derived by relatively few unemployed, that is, primarily the construction industry proper. The Federation of Swedish Industries also asserted that the use of available means to finance such works might ultimately entail a corresponding reduction of private enterprises and thereby merely have an offsetting effect.11 3. Unemployment

Insurance

In the Swedish employers' appraisal of the unemployment relief program, they have also expressed themselves on the subject of governmentally supported unemployment insurance. It is possibly significant to note that from employers as such one finds scarcely any discussion of this form of relief in Denmark and in Norway. And the evaluation given it by the Swedish employers has concerned the mechanism rather than the principles of the subject. 10 It is interesting to see that this statement is borne out by the protest of Robert Watt, Secretary of the Massachusetts State Federation of Labor, against the inequalities of wages in public-works projects in Massachusetts. According to the announcement in July of 1933 by Secretary of the Interior Ickes, a wage scale for public-works projects paying $1.20 an hour for skilled labor and 50 cents an hour for the unskilled would hold for Massachusetts. Mr. Watt asserts that the Bureau of Public Roads informed him that such a scale would not apply to road work, but that JJ cents and 45 cents respectively for skilled and unskilled work was the scale. Mr. Watt asserted that the former scale was "unfair and ridiculous discrimination. We are vigorously protesting a situation which would see men on similar public works receiving greatly different wages." (Boston Transcript, 29 Aug. 1933.) u

Kommerstella Mcddclanden, No. 2, pp. 35-37)-

Nos. 3-4, 1931 ( I . L . l . , Vol. XXXVIII,

THE EMPLOYERS' ATTITUDE

95

It narrows down primarily to three questions upon which there remains so much diversity of thought that employers need not as yet add any further opinion in order to keep the question open and undecided. The three questions are: T o what extent is unemployment insurable—that is, what conditions of trade, occupation, and age preclude the use of this method of relief?; what should be the basis of classifying occupations in order to approach some degree of similarity in the extent of unemployment risk within each class?—(which is, of course, prerequisite to securing payment of premiums from the worker in proportion to his occupational risk); and, should the scheme be compulsory or voluntary in character? But even if these questions can be met, the employers insist that under a system of governmentally supported unemployment insurance, the state and the commune must bring assistance to the unemployed young and old, and to the others who have long been without work. 12 In addition to this they refer—not without some sarcasm and ridicule—to the wavering position taken by those who are accepted as authorities. They find that Professor Ohlin would hold that "unemployment in its entirety is not insurable . . . but that seasonal work must be omitted." After pointing out that Professor Ohlin asserted and withdrew ("how often it is hard to say, or with what he stopped") he finally recommended unemployment insurance for an "economic middle class" and the "well-organized industrial worker". 13 Dr. Lundberg, they find, " Industrie, Jrgang X X V I I I , No. 24, 18 Nov. 1 9 3 1 , pp. 597-98. " Industrie, Argang X X V I I I , No. 23, 4 Nov. 1932, p. 566.

96

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

would wish to separate the unfortunate and the permanently unemployed from the other social classes and give these special household provision, while the unemployment insurance is to apply to the remaining workers. But, the employers observe, society has not such a permanent social or economic slum! 14 In answer to the Minister of Social Affairs, M r . Moller, who queried, If unemployment insurance was so bad in England and Germany why didn't they discard it? it was merely observed by the employers that legislation which is deeply entrenched in this national economy is difficult to eradicate. This, in brief, states the case concerning unemployment relief as the Scandinavian employers see it. There has been on their part a general acceptance of the fundamental approach to the problem, namely, that of a coordinated program with a centralized administration, which has characterized the treatment of relief of unemployment in their respective countries; but there has also been a critical questioning of basic problems involved in that program. These include, as we have seen, the question of the real place of government projects in the national economy, that is, Shall they be limited to public works per se, whose function is that of alleviating existing unemployment, or shall they be very broadly conceived as measures of social " Idem. (I cannot refrain from quoting directly the words of the editor in his humorous interpretation of this academic discussion: "Med ufprörd ton fritog haii sig frdn 'negatniismen' i frägan om försäkringsformen—i det lit nästan som om det gällde religiös jömekelse." While this loses most of its color by translation, for the benefit of the reader who does not use the Swedish language it would be rendered, "With an agitated voice he freed himself from 'negativism* in the question of unemployment insurance—it sounded as though it concerned religious denunciation.")

THE EMPLOYERS' ATTITUDE

97

"rationalization"? Also the question—of vital concern as soon as there is social acceptance of complete organization of workers—has been repeatedly raised as to what are the proper criteria in the determination of the wage policy on government works. And again, When has unemployment reached the point that social insurance would be applicable, taking into consideration all the factors which have a direct bearing upon the determination of the degree of risk?15 Such has been the critical appraisal of the workers on the one hand and of the employers on the other. It has been fruitful in calling forth from the Governments an examination of every phase of the unemployment relief programs with which they have been concerned. This examination we shall now consider. "Apropos of this, the objection was raised to the proposal of the Committee of Eight, appointed by the Swedish Government in 1926 to study the problem of unemployment insurance, when in the findings of the Committee, submitted in 1928, it excluded agricultural and forestry workers as unacceptable for unemployment insurance. (/.£./., Vol. X X V I , No. 12, 18 June 1928, p. +57.)

VII T H E GOVERNMENTS' POSITION A L T H O U G H the different parts of the Scandinavian I J L unemployment relief program are highly interrelated and the controversy which has concerned any phase of unemployment relief has involved the whole of the governmental program, it is nevertheless true that criticism directed at the administration of relief has centered on public works and unemployment insurance. T h e Government in each country has had to evaluate most carefully its efforts in these two fields. In this chapter we shall examine first the view of the governments on their public works program, and, secondly, their statement of the case on unemployment insurance. i. The Public Works Program in Sweden W e have seen that the extensive program of public works carried on in Sweden for two decades has been in the hands of the State Unemployment Commission and that it has conceived its jurisdiction in the broad sense of organizing all efforts and measures which would have a bearing upon the minimizing and alleviating of unemployment. Among these have been: averting labor disputes, persuading employers to ration work and organize seasonal projects, developing employment exchanges, in98

THE GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

99

creasing the number of jobs by extending the normal activities of the government and by organizing special relief works. When such measures were inadequate the public authorities have granted cash relief payments, the responsibility for which rested with the communes, although the State subsidy granted them remained in the hands of the Commission for administration.1 It is clear from this that while public works in Sweden are regarded as the primary factor in relief, such works have, nevertheless, been but one part of a whole coordinated program. This is even more true in Norway and Denmark, where governmental projects have not had the highly developed central administration which has been true in Sweden. T h e foregoing chapters have given the critical appraisal of the public works program by the workers and by the employers. With the former group this has amounted to an attack on each and all of the principles basic to the Commission's administration.} with the latter, it has been a criticism of the practice, at least so far as the potential effect might be concerned. It is therefore significant to turn to the findings of an expert committee appointed in June 1924 by the Swedish Government to assist the Minister of Social Affairs in making an inquiry into the question of public works as a means of unemployment relief. T h e report of this Committee is especially worthy of consideration inasmuch as the study, published in July 1925, covers the whole period of the major unemployment 1 E . G. Huss, " T h e Organization of Public Works and Other Measures for the Relief of Unemployment in Sweden," International Labour Review, Vol. X X V I , No. 1, July 1932, p. 27.

IOO

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

crisis of 1920-21, during which more than 2 5 % of the workers were unemployed. T h e table below gives the distribution of the governmental unemployment expenditures according to the statement of this official investigation. TABLE XI GOVERNMENTAL

EXPENDITURES

OF SWEDEN

SITUATION

IN MEETING THE

UNEMPLOYMENT

I9I4-I9I4

Type of Expenditure

Kr.

Per Cent

State grant to communal projects " « « Unemployment Commission's projects " 1 0 communal administrative activities . . " " " " educational program " " " state-commune projects " purchases of highway materials

21 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

13

96,750,000

62

" " per enactment of Parliament, 1922.. Completion of projects under way Miscellaneous grants Unemployment Commission's administrative cost . .

15,000,000

Total

1,092,469 325,000 256,818 9,175,000

6

5 0 7 0 2 0 2 5 9 9 7

3,100,000

2 0

7,588,010

4 9 0 3

500,000 154,787,297

IOO

0

Source: Socialdepartementet: Betänkande med Fot ¡lag till Motvcrkande av Arbetslöshet genom Anordnande av AUmänna Arbeten. Statins Ojfentliga Utredningar IQ25: 29, p. 56.

It will be seen from this report that the provision of work has been the main feature of the Government's policy for relieving unemployment in this first post-war depression period—which in fact might be regarded as typical of the later depression years. Between 6 0 % and 7 0 % of the total expenditures were made directly for

T H E G O V E R N M E N T S ' POSITION

101

wages to workers on public relief works. A remarkable point indicated by the statistics in Table X I is the phenomenally low cost of governmental administration of the public works program. That the administrative expense of the State Unemployment Commission did not exceed 3 / 1 0 of 1 % , and decentralized administrative activities was covered by 7 / 1 0 of 1 % , is especially worthy of consideration. T h e burden of this element of cost has, however, increased considerably, for according to the Director-General of the Social Board the "Central Administration cost per man-day" was approximately 5 % for 1930-31.2 T h e four categories into which the total costs for the carrying on of the relief projects may be distributed are wages, materials and transportation, supervision, and administration. T h e relative importance of these may be readily seen in Chart V (p. 1 0 2 ) . Of the total expenditure by the State for unemployment relief work, from 62 to 85 per cent has gone into wages paid directly to workmen on the projects. That wage payments absorbed no more than 62 per cent of the total amount expended on government relief work in 1 9 2 4 was due to the fact that the total disbursement in that year fell to 3 , 6 1 6 , 7 8 7 Kr. from 27,023,866 Kr. in the previous year. A large part of the administrative cost being fixed it is true, of course, that this cost element would absorb a larger percentage of a smaller total expenditure. T h e 1 9 2 4 committee of experts recommended that the public-work policy of the Unemployment Commission be * Cf., Note j, Chap. IV, above, pp. 44-45.

CHART

V

DISTRIBUTION OF T O T A L COST OF T H E N A T I O N A L R E L I E F W O R K IN S W E D E N , 1 9 1 8 - 1 9 3 1

(PER

PUBLIC

DAY)»

/)t/-£W

* For the sources from which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C, Table X X I , pp. 186-187. (No figures are obtainable for 1925»6.)

T H E GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

103

continued. Sweden, it explained, possessed unusual opportunity for public projects, such as road building and forestry improvement, which in no way would interfere with the normal demand for labor. Apropos of the Unemployment Commission's basic policy concerning wages, the expert committee supported the practice of the Administration, asserting that wages on public projects should be lower than those prevailing in industry and also that unemployed workers should be obliged to accept other employment if available. Unemployment relief on such lines does not remove the incentive to find normal employment, and has proved itself really practicable. Where the organization of public works involves special difficulty or delay, however, arrangements should be made for the payment of cash relief. As to the works to be undertaken, the experts indicated that these should have general economic and educational value, but that they should not involve competition with ordinary industrial or commercial undertakings} they should be of a kind where labor costs form a high proportion of the total cost and overhead charges are low, and they must lend themselves to expansion or contraction as the situation demands. Such projects as can be continued throughout the winter are especially desirable. It was also claimed that the projects selected should be such that any worker of normal capacity could perform the work. Finally, it may be added, the committee of experts proposed that the organization which had been set up to provide relief work under the State Unemployment Commission should be maintained in skeleton form even during periods of

104

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

prosperity. It is, however, significant to call attention to the fact that during the discussion in the Riksdag the Minister of Social Affairs supported the idea of a combined system of unemployment insurance and work. 3 During the last period of extreme stringency—that is, beginning in 1 9 3 1 — w e have seen that the Government's program of relief as a whole has been under criticism and has called forth the inventory of available work that might be suitable in extending the government work much more fully. Relative to this, the figures in Table I X , p. 77, give the cost of the immediately available projects as 205,760,418 Kr. This, compared with 41,618,000 Kr. (the cost of the projects under way in 1932), gave rise to the charge on the part of the workers that the government works program was not performing its real function, either in scope or in "rationalizing" economic life. T h e Government Board of Trade approved the general principle upon which the workers' charge was based, and advised that public works be "adapted to economic conditions." It is a curious fact that the Unemployment Commission has not refuted this charge, as in fact it could. Using public works for "rationalizing economic l i f e " or "adapting public works to economic conditions" must simply be interpreted to mean that public work should be used to counteract seasonal and cyclical unemployment. T h e former has definitely been accomplished by the Commission. This is brought out in Chart V I , on p. 105 which shows the fluctuations of employment in private industry and on * Sociala Meddelanden, 19*5» PP- 48-4-9)-

No. 10, 192J (I.L.I.,

Vol. X V I , No. 8, 23 Nov.

T H E GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

105

public projects. It may be seen on this chart that the increase in the numbers of workers on public projects is CHART FLUCTUATIONS

OF

EMPLOYMENT

IN

VI

PRIVATE

P R O J E C T S IN S W E D E N ,

INDUSTRY

A N D ON

PUBLIC

1922-193+*

* F o r the sources from which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C , Tables X V and X X , pp. 161-164 and 178-184, respectively.

synchronized almost perfectly with the decrease of employment in private industry. T h e lag in the peak of activity on public projects from the dip of employment in

io6

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

private industry is almost exactly the same each year. This, it may be noted, is a two- to three-month lag. T h e administration of the public works program has, therefore, been "adapted to economic conditions" from the point of view of counteracting seasonal unemployment. It is truei that the degree to which public projects have been able to meet seasonal unemployment has been inadequate, as is brought out in Chart V I I I (see page 123), but this should not be confused with the policy that has been followed by the Unemployment Commission. O n the score that public works should counteract cyclical unemployment it is strange that the Commission has not defended its position by pointing out that the prediction of cyclical unemployment is not possible either as to time or degree. T h e theory of the business cycle remaining an unsolved problem, any attempt to prepare a social program to meet the unemployment difficulty caused by the business cycle must be a matter of guess or chance. Recognizing, at least in part, the criticisms referred to above, the Minister of Social Affairs presented to the 1931 session of the Swedish Riksdag the proposal that parliamentary appropriations should be made for works which in any case would be carried out sooner or later by use of public funds, and were of such a nature that the Riksdag would under normal circumstances vote the necessary funds. But the deviation from normal procedure was that the Government, when making its selection among the various proposals for projects put forward by the different governmental departments, should take into account not only the degree of urgency of the work itself, but also

T H E GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

107

its importance from the point of view of relieving unemployment. Labor was to be employed through the public employment exchanges in districts where unemployment was particularly severe, and the work was to be reserved for workers possessing the necessary qualifications.4 The Government's proposal has now been made effective, for it has secured the adoption by the Parliament in 1933 of its unemployment relief program of 100,000,000 Kr. for special public works at normal wage rates, 55,000,000 Kr. of the usual type of public relief work in which wages are paid on the basis of the lowest wages for unskilled labor, and 25,000,000 Kr. for cash relief payments.5 This is again a decisive recognition by the Government of the necessity of a combined, coordinated program of unemployment relief. To what degree the size of the first two items in the above appropriations (which, it is to be observed, amount to three times the total cost of all government projects under way in 1932) reflects a recognition of workers' demands and a departure from the early principles and practices of the State Unemployment Commission, is difficult to say. That this departure has occurred is suggested by the fact that the unemployment relief program has become a part of another field, that of the monetary program of price stabilization. Pro4

UtrikesdefartemenUts Pressbyra, Riksdagsoversikt, III, 1931 (I.L.I., Vol. X X X I X , No. 2, pp. 4.J-46). T h e public work suggested as acceptable under the conditions mentioned above included electrification of railways, construction of bridges at crossings, geological surveys of State ore resources, harbor and breakwater work, etc. ' Arbelet, Stockholm, 11 June 1933! Fackforeningsrorelsen, 23 June 1933 (/•£•/., Vol. XLV, p. 374).

io8

SCANDINAVIAN U N E M P L O Y M E N T

fessor Beckhart of Columbia University, who has investigated the latter problem, has pointed out that large public works are intended as one means to this end. 8 T h e demand for this "advance planning" of public works for relief purposes (beredskapsarbeten) has been given much support by the apparent reluctance, or limitations, of the various governmental departments to expand currently their employment activities. It will be recalled that the Swedish Unemployment Commission in 1914. requested each of the departments in the national government to make a thorough inventory of available work which could be undertaken when unemployment developed. A f t e r considerable official agitation to expand activity, and with some years to develop fully the necessary plans and organization, it could naturally be expected that when the 1925-26 period of severe depression developed, the various departments of the national government would be ready to increase their industrial activities, g o into the labor market and employ more workers. T h i s did not develop even with the state departments where expansion and maintenance work would seem to be open to much flexibility, as in the case of the state departments of railways, of waterfalls (electric light and power), and of telephone and telegraph. In 1913 the railway department employed on the average 2,470 workers. In the years 1925 through 1929 inclusive, the workers numbered 2,235; 1 , 6 0 1 ; 1,622; 1 , 4 3 7 ; a n ( i T>234-> respectively. W e see here contraction rather than expansion. T h e ' " S w e d e n Maintains Even Price Levels," New

1933-

York

Times,

Aug.

13,

THE GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

109

waterfalls department showed an even more decided contraction, for with 2,712 workers in December of 1913, the figures for the same month in 1925 and 1926 were respectively 1,258 and 614. In the case of the telephone and telegraph department the number of workers employed remained almost exactly the same for the whole period of I9I3-29. 7 Two important facts are to be noted from these statistics, namely, the relative fixity of the functioning of the governmental departments and the very small number of workers employed by the Government in these highly standardized industries which the Government operates. In this connection the official report merely states that "with regard to government activities operated on a commercial basis—telephone-telegraph, railways, and electricity production—it is impossible to expand seasonally to meet seasonal unemployment, due to technical and economic reasons. Adjusting work according to cyclical unemployment could not apply, to an appreciable degree, in these industries inasmuch as the work undertaken must await existing or manifest need."8 2. Public Works in Norway and Denmark In the unemployment relief program of Norway and of Denmark, public works have never played the part that they have in Sweden, nor has there been a similar degree of discussion of the question. In the case of Den' Socialdefartementet: Betankande med Forslag angdende Arbetsloshetens Motverkande genom Beredskafsarbeten. Statens Ofentliga Utredningar '93': }> Stockholm 1 9 3 1 , p. 66. " Socialdefartementet: Betankande, of. cit., p. 73.

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

IIO

mark, provision for very small amounts of public funds incorporated in the legislation of 1924 and 1925 were of little relative significance. 9 Some added effort made in 1932 along this direction contemplated giving employers who engaged more workers the right to a subsidy in the form of a specified percentage of the wages paid to newly hired workers. T h i s measure would have applied to the whole industrial field. T h e National Industrial Council has caused the rejection of such a scheme by holding it to be ineffective in its possibilities. 10 T h e n in January 1933 the Prime Minister gave his support to a comprehensive plan for setting up an Unemployment Council for planning special public works, but it seems that this narrowed down during the next two months to a reversion to the plan of subsidies for employers under the proposal of 1932. 1 1 Finally the outcome in 1933 was the enactment of emergency legislation granting the small sum of 3,000,000 K r . for "voluntary labor service" of young persons. 12 T h e tendency of unemployment to increase caused the Danish government to consider more vigorous measures. T h e Government in the early part of this year ( 1 9 3 4 ) instructed the Unemployment Council to examine means of increasing employment in agriculture. T h e Council was ' A c t of 1924—Minister of Social A f f a i r s empowered to grant thirty year, 5 loans, up to an aggregate amount of 8,000,000 K r . , in aid of work begun before 1 June 1926. A c t of 1 9 2 5 — a n additional grant of not more than 2 0 % of the cost of the materials for w o r k begun before that date. A sum of 1,000,000 K r . was made available for this purpose. 10 11

Socialt Tidsskrift, Socialdemokraten,

March 1932 ( I . L . I . , Vol. X L I I , No. 3, p. 9 0 ) . 23 M a r c h 1933 ( I . L . I . , Vol. X L V I , No. 6, pp.

156-57)u

Cf., Chap. I V , above, pp. 61-62.

T H E GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

in

also requested to consider whether the measures taken in recent years are capable of serving as the basis of a gradual extension of employment in other branches of industry. The Government recommended a fairer distribution of available work, encouraging elderly workers to retire on pension, raising the school-leaving age, lowering the maximum daily hours of work, and taking measures against extra work being undertaken by public servants as well as other forms of multiple employment. T h e Council was asked to consider the possibilities and the practical effects of limiting the hours of work more than to the prevailing forty-hour week on public works and in such projects subsidized by the public. It is interesting to note that the membership of the Unemployment Council was increased by including outstanding representatives of the Government, the trade unions, commerce, agriculture, and economic science.13 This most recent report of the position of the Danish government relative to unemployment relief is significant in indicating that an integrated public works program has not developed. One does not see the shaping of the local or national structure which is charged with the administration of a public works program such as in Sweden. 3. Unemployment Insurance

Now as to the views of the Scandinavian Governments on the part of unemployment insurance in their program of relief. In the light of the extensiveness of unemployBerlingske Ttdende, Politiken, and Social-Demokraten, 14 Jan. 1934, (I.LJ., Vol. XLIX, No. 7, 11 Feb. 1934, p. 234). u

H2

SCANDINAVIAN U N E M P L O Y M E N T

ment insurance in Europe 14 it is natural that careful consideration should be given to this type of relief by a government which has not established it, and in which the movement for social legislation has been as strong as has been the case in Sweden. After remarkably careful examination of this question in that country the Government's position has remained indefinitive. As indicative of this, the report of the Committee of Eight, which was appointed in 1926 to study the problem of unemployment insurance and the possibility of coordinating it with the system of public relief works, may be cited. T h e Committee, composed of members belonging to different political parties together with consulting experts, was divided on the question whether or not the introduction of such insurance was desirable. Four members favored it and four were opposed. There was, however, more agreement on the point that, if unemployment insurance were adopted, the compulsory form should be selected.16 T h e Department of Social Affairs supplemented this investigation by another inquiry during 1930. Simultaneously, comprehensive study by a special committee produced the report, "Arbetsloshetens Omjattning, Karakt'dr, och Orsaker" (Extent, Character, and Causes of Unemployment). 16 T h e Department of Social Affairs in its u Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, N o r w a y , Netherlands, Switzerland ( 1 1 cantons), and Czechoslovakia have voluntary systems, while Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Irish Free State, Switzerland ( i z cantons), Italy, and Poland have compulsory unemployment insurance.

" I.L.I., V o l . X X V I , N o . 12, 18 June 1928, pp. 456-57. w Statens Offentliga Utredningar 1931:20, Socialdefartementet, Arbetsloshetsulredningens Betdnkande I (Stockholm 1 9 3 1 ) . A s a part of this

THE GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

113

report in 1 9 3 1 made two proposals, one for compulsory unemployment insurance and the other for voluntary insurance on a trade-union basis subsidized by the State. Very significant, however, in the appraisal of insurance as a type of relief is the view expressed by the Department that the problem of unemployment cannot be solved in that manner and that the assistance afforded by the insurance program would be so limited in application that the public and private relief measures in operation at present would have to be maintained almost to the same extent as before. The Department, it is important to note, bases its opinion on an estimate of the effects of unemployment insurance according to each of the two proposals mentioned above. With special reference to compulsory insurance, the Department found that 9.7% of the total number of weeks of unemployment in 1929 would have been disregarded under such a plan of relief. Of the remaining 90.3%, daily benefit would have been payable only to the extent of 3 8 . 2 % , and no less than 5 2 . 1 % would have been unprovided for through having exhausted their right to benefit, although still out of employment. By 1 9 3 1 the percentage of those unprovided for would have reached approximately 5 6 % . Other difficulties involved in the use of compulsory unemployment insurance, according to the Department of Social Affairs, is that it general study, Professor Gosta Bagge, University of Stockholm, submitted a special report on the causes of unemployment, and Dr. G. E. Huss, Director-General of the Social Board, prepared a report on the labor market and the factors determining its development.

U4

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

would encourage the local authorities to transfer their responsibility in unemployment relief work to the insurance system. T h e same would be true of employers. T h e inadequacy of this plan was also emphasized with regard to the old and the young workers. Concerning voluntary unemployment insurance, the Department made it clear that it had the weakness of covering only the members of trade unions, and that during periods of depression unorganized workers would have to be cared for by special measures. Moreover, voluntary insurance tends to develop a marked local and/or occupational character which, it was held, would adversely influence one of the most important conditions essential to the readjustment of the labor market, namely, the mobility of labor.17 It was also maintained that in diminishing the burdens of the trade unions in supplying unemployment relief for their members, the Government grant would enable the workers to allocate increased sums to other purposes and thus cause the public unwittingly to contribute toward the support of the workers' wage policy. Finally, the rate of unemployment benefits, being fixed on the basis of the actual standard of wages, might—in view of the lower wages prevailing in rural districts—increase still further the flow of labor from country to town, " T h i s has been the case in England. Decreased mobility as between occupations

has resulted

from

some

occupations

being

provided

with

unemployment relief and not others. Entry into agriculture and domestic service is said to have been retarded because these occupations are

ex-

cluded from provision of unemployment relief. ( C f . , E. M . Burns, " T h e Economics of Unemployment R e l i e f , " Pafers nual Meeting,

Am. Ec. Assoc., Dec. 1 9 3 2 ) .

and Proceedings,

45th

An-

THE GOVERNMENTS' POSITION

115

which it was felt is largely responsible for urban unemployment.18 The year following these proposals made by the Department of Social Affairs—that is, in 1932—the Government authorized the Minister of the Department to appoint another expert committee for further consideration of the question. The test of the Government to put through state-subsidized unemployment insurance was made this summer, with the result to which we have already referred—approval by the Second Chamber of the Riksdag but defeat in the First Chamber.19 We have now seen the position of the Swedish Government on the question of unemployment insurance in its program of relief. In Norway and Denmark, the Governments—as explained in Chapter III—have extended by means of emergency legislation the provisions of their voluntary unemployment systems so that differentiation between that form of relief and cash payments is quite impossible.20 The Governments have expressed no judgment as to the soundness or the consequences of such extension of support to the unemployment insurance societies. They have been faced with a situation, in view of " Svenska Dagbladet, 18 J u n e 1931 (IJL.L, Vol. X X X I X , No. 6, pp. 210-12). F o r the discussion of " T h e Labor Question in Swedish Agriculture," see Sveriget Jordbruksdefartementet: Arbetarfragan mom Svenska Jordbruket. St at ens Offentliga Utredningar 1932:14. J ordbruksutredningar Betankanden VIII. (Stockholm, 1 9 3 1 ) . u Arbetet, 21 June 1933 (I.L.I., Vol. XLVII, No. 4, p. 1 6 7 ) . " A s seen in the nature of the measures which were proposed for this year. Cf., Social Demoiraten, Copenhagen, 3 Dec. 1932 (I.L.I., Vol. XLV, N o . 2, pp. 4 5 - 4 7 ) -

116

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

the inflexibility of public-works measures, which had to be met by employing that part of their unemployment relief program which did possess flexibility, namely, larger governmental grants of funds which have been used for direct cash-relief payments to the unemployed.

VIII CONCLUSIONS

W

E HAVE now considered the administration of the unemployment relief program in the Scandinavian countries, as well as the appraisal of that program by the workers, the employers, and the Governments. What are the conclusions which can be drawn on the basis of that administration and appraisal? It may be well to preface the discussion to which we shall turn by the observation—definitely confirmed by this study—that in the relief of unemployment we face a most complicated set of interrelated social problems. The interrelationship is not only one with respect to the different parts of the relief program per se—cash payments, unemployment insurance, and public works—but also, and more important, an interrelationship of the program of unemployment relief with the whole social economic structure. Although frequently, if not always ignored, this is clearly the case, inasmuch as any measure of unemployment relief becomes ipso facto a direct or indirect influence on the price structure, and thereby creates repercussions of a much more far-reaching nature than what would, at first glance, seem to be true. To these broader social implications we shall refer in the latter part of this chapter. The discussion that follows will rest not only upon the 117

118

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

material which has been presented in the foregoing chapters, but also upon the information which I have secured in my conversations and interviews with Scandinavian workers and their leaders, employers, and government officials. W e shall first consider those conclusions that pertain to the administrative aspects of unemployment relief which can be drawn from the Scandinavian experience. i. The Administrative Aspects of Unemployment Relief In the first place, the remedial possibilities of the whole social program of unemployment relief can readily be overstated. This is true even when it is granted that unemployment is a problem which can be met neither by the individual worker on his own part nor by the social group passively awaiting the return of employment as a result of economic readjustment brought about by competitive forces. In substantiation of this assertion the social program of the Scandinavian countries—in which, as a matter of fact, relief to the unemployed is accepted as a social governmental function—is significant. After a long period of experience with an extensive public system of unemployment relief one finds in Sweden that nearly one-half of those out of work receive no assistance.1 And that the proportion aided is even as high as it is, is due to the extension of the direct cash-relief part of the program to 1 43.3 % in March 1932 (International Labour Office, Unemployment Insurance and Various Forms of Relief for the Unemployed, p. 206, Geneva, 1933).

CONCLUSIONS

119

an increasing degree during the recent period.2 This is seen in Chart V I I which gives the total number of unemployed workers and the number of those given relief, CHART

VII

N U M B E R OF U N E M P L O Y E D WORKERS IN SWEDEN G I V E N R E L I E F ,

1920-1933* 7/jousonc/a

* F o r the sources from which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C , Tables X V and X X , pp. 1 6 1 - 1 6 4 and 1 7 8 - 1 8 4 , respectively.

either in cash or work. It brings out the fact that from November 1923 to the summer of 1932 considerably less than half of the unemployed trade union members ob" According to the statement of the Minister of Social A f f a i r s ( D a g e n t Nyheter,

I M a y 1 9 3 1 [I.L.I.,

V o l . X L I I , N o . 7 , p. I J I ] ) .

izo

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

tained relief. T h e interpretation of this chart, however, must be carefully made. B y referring to Chart I I I , above (page 1 7 ) , it will be observed that the number applying for work at the local offices of the Unemployment Commission is much larger than the trade union members who are reported as unemployed for the period of 1 9 2 1 to October 1 9 2 4 and also for that of 1 9 3 2 on, whereas for the intervening period the unemployment as reported by the trade unions is much higher. This accounts for the fact that the relief curve in Chart V I I rises above the unemployment curve. T h e explanation for the difference in the reports on the extent of unemployment is undoubtedly a different one for each of these three periods. F o r the first one (that of 1 9 2 1 - 2 4 ) labor was not as fully unionized as in later years, and hence the union figures were inadequate as a measure of unemployment. For the years

1924-32,

the trade unions, which

had become

more inclusive, were taking care of a larger share of the relief burden through their own union benefit funds. Then, too, a low wage policy on government projects discouraged the unemployed workers from applying for relief in the form of work on such projects. Finally, from 1 9 3 2 on two factors were very influential in increasing the number of unemployed registered at the local offices of the Unemployment Commission. T h e first was the increasing exhaustion of union benefit funds, and the second was growing liberality of the administration on government projects, especially with respect to the wage policy. T h e Government of Sweden, going again into the hands of the Social Democrats in the latter months of

CONCLUSIONS

121

1 9 3 2, would in itself have increased the number applying for relief on public works. T h e limitations, or remedial possibilities, of the whole social program of unemployment relief being what they are, it is evident that private charity, help from institutions and poor-law authorities, and aid from workers' organizations play a very important role. Nor does this inadequacy of the program for relief to the unemployed worker take into consideration another phase of the question, that is, whether the relief granted to those who have been helped is sufficient. I do not wish to enter into this aspect of the problem. It is a distinct field of sociological investigation dealing with workers' "standard of living," "budgets," "subsistence levels," et cetera, concerning which a great deal has been written. In the material presented above the exact amounts of the relief grants have been given; and at this point I merely wish to emphasize that the limitation of the social program of assisting the unemployed cannot be adequately seen in the percentage of those out of employment who have been given no support by public authorities. Secondly, within the program of unemployment relief such as Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have pursued, in which cash relief, unemployment insurance, and public works are coordinated, the usefulness of each measure is limited. The degree of this limitation is difficult to determine, either practically or theoretically. It depends, quite naturally, upon such factors in the situation as the extent and duration of the unemployment period; the policy of organized labor, of employers, and of the Gov-

122

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

ernment; and the continuity with which the social unemployment relief program has operated over the preceding years. T o take the Swedish figures again as a basis f o r an examination of the Scandinavian situation one may secure a definite measure of the possibilities of public work as a device for meeting the unemployment relief problem. Chart V I I I gives the percentage of unemployed workers who received work on public projects, the percentage who were given cash, and also the percentage of the total number of unemployed workers aided during the years of 1 9 2 2 - 3 4 . This computation is based upon the numbers applying at the local offices of the Unemployment Commission and not upon the number of idle workers as reported by the trade unions (as in the case of Chart V I I ) . W e have, therefore, a direct comparison of unemployment relief applied for and unemployment relief granted. Certain striking facts are clearly brought out. These are, first, that during the last ten years, excepting for a total of a few months, the percentage of unemployed workers applying at the government unemployment relief offices who were given work on public projects has not exceeded 40 per cent; secondly, that since midyear of 1 9 3 1 there has been a notable decrease in the percentage of the unemployed workers seeking help who have been given work on public projects—falling to less than 25 per cent; thirdly, that during the same period a sharp increase has taken place in those given cash relief—rising from 1 1 per cent to 4 1 per cent; and fourthly, that during the present period of mass unemployment the combined cash and work relief measures

CONCLUSIONS CHART

123

VIII

T H E PERCENTAGE OF T H E T O T A L N U M B E R OF U N E M P L O Y E D WORKERS IN SWEDEN GIVEN CASH, GIVEN W O R K R E L I E F , AND GIVEN CASH OR W O R K ,

1912-1934»

* For the sources from which the data have been gathered and the statistics on which this chart is based, see Appendix C, Table XX, pp. 178-184.

124

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

have assisted not more than from 5 5 per cent to 69 per cent of those applying at the Unemployment Commission's offices. A high degree of interdependence must, therefore, exist in the social measures which are taken. T h e Scandinavian experience points to three definite factors to which may be attributed the inadequacy of any single measure, and consequently the necessary interdependence of the various measures. These are: the extreme difficulty of defining "unemployment" and "the unemployed" j the great difference of conditions in occupation, in place, and in age of workers throughout the whole range of employment, and in turn the effect of these differences upon the regularity of work as well as the nature of the relief measure which can be successfully applied; and the inflexibility of the measures of relief (inherent, of course, in any social legislation or activity) relative to the great degree of changeability in employment. B y the first of these three—that of the difficulty of defining "the unemployed"—I refer to that which is involved in the separation of poor relief from unemployment relief, of care for the defective from the help to the able, of special assistance to the minor from the occupational assistance to the adult, of corrective measures for the unwilling from the adequate support to the willing. It is obvious that "unemployment" can be readily defined in the abstract, but in practice it becomes peculiarly difficult to apply the economically sound criteria of unemployment and to deal with the problem of unemployment relief quite separately from the several other very different social

CONCLUSIONS

125

problems with which the unemployment problem is interwoven. It is readily admitted that the distinctions referred to above are fundamental in differentiating that which is from that which is not unemployment, and so far as this division cannot be accomplished in practice, unemployment relief necessarily becomes open to maladministration and exploitation. Due in large part to a thoroughly developed local administration working in cooperation with public employment exchanges, the Scandinavian countries have undoubtedly gone farther than can be done elsewhere in separating the unemployed from the unemployable and in restricting the unemployment relief program to the former. It is, however, equally true that sympathy has caused the use of unemployment relief to be extended over into the field of poor relief j and political strength of unions has resulted in the test of willingness to work to give way with the consequent extension of unemployment relief to those who are not willing to accept that which could be reasonably regarded as suitable work. It follows, therefore, from this difficulty—if not impossibility—of separating the problem of unemployment from the other problems of maladjustment, that any attempt to deal with unemployment quite independently from closely related social questions must be unsound, from anything but a short-run momentary point of view. Precisely this is recognized in the new social law, enacted during the summer of 1 9 3 3 in Denmark, which provides for the concentration into one administration, in both the national and in the local governments, of all legislation dealing with social insurance measures, thereby centralizing in-

126

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

formation and administration, which are essentially interdependent. The second factor referred to above as accounting for the inadequacy of any single measure and the interdependence of the various measures of unemployment relief, is the great difference in the conditions of occupation and in the age of the workers throughout the whole range of employment, with the direct effect that this would have upon the regularity of work together with the measures to be used. With respect to the difference in the conditions of occupation, the extreme case is that of agricultural activity with its high degree of seasonal variation, as compared with industrial production with its relative stability. Combined with this difference of irregularity of work, there is also the fact that the former is manual and the latter is skilled work. It naturally follows that any one measure (at least if that be of a uniform sort) of relief must be ineffective. This has been borne out by the Scandinavian experience in which the unemployed among the agricultural workers and the highly skilled among the industrial workers have not been assisted in a degree comparable to the workers in the model group composed of the unspecialized urban workers.8 With regard to differences in age among the unemployed, it has also made inapplicable any one measure of relief. In view of this fact, Denmark and Sweden have periodically carried on public support for vocational and educational * See discussion below in connection with the conclusion which follows concerning public works as a relief measure, pp. 1 3 1 - 1 3 4 .

CONCLUSIONS

127

courses to the unemployed young workers, rather than to employ them on governmental works. The third factor which we have pointed out (i.e., the inherent inflexibility of the various measures of relief, relative to the great degree of changeability in unemployment) has given further support to conclusions which we have stated relative to the need of a combined, interdependent system of relief. The exceptionally favorable conditions under which the public works program of Sweden, and the unemployment insurance program of Denmark, have been carried on would justify the assertion that certainly in those countries the largest percentage of unemployed would be aided which it would be possible to assist under each of these measures. It is, therefore, especially significant that these have not been flexible enough to furnish relief to the unemployed when the contraction of employment in the labor market has been rapid. This leads us to the third conclusion, pertaining to the administrative aspect of the subject, that can be drawn from this case study we have made. It is this: Unemployment relief calls for a high degree of centralization in administration and an equal degree of decentralization in supervision. The former is expressed in each of the Scandinavian national governments by means of the Department (or Ministry) of Social Affairs; the latter is accomplished by thoroughly developed public labor exchanges.4 Essential to the success in both phases of this organization is a permanent organizational structure with continuity in its functioning. *C/., Appendix A, pp. 143-153.

128

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

A n d precisely on this point the Scandinavian unemployment relief experiment—and particularly that of Sweden — h a s made its main contribution. Unemployment—in greater or less d e g r e e — h a s been recognized as a permanent phenomenon of the existing economic order and its relief as a problem calling for a constantly operating social machine. T h e principle laid down on this score found definite enunciation in the conclusion of a special parliamentary committee of 1925. It stated: E v e n should unemployment decrease at different phases of the business cycle, its entire disappearance f r o m modern society is impossible. T h e r e will always be a certain group o f persons w h i c h is unemployed. Obviously the individual suffers equally as much f r o m

unemployment

and is in just as great need o f help whether the total o f the unemployed is large or small. It, t h e r e f o r e , follows that the need of u n e m ployment relief activity always exists . . . w h i c h can be seen

from

the t w o last years [ 1 9 2 3 - 2 5 ] w h i c h w e r e of a normal sort. 5

T h e Committee goes on to point out that an altogether new and special situation has arisen in view of the fact that emigration, which as a measure of relief for the pressure of unemployment served a positive purpose in years past, was no longer operative. It is not our purpose here to evaluate the soundness of the view expressed by the Committee on the permanency of unemployment as a social economic phenomenon. It is obvious that this leads one far into the fields of business-cycle theory, credit control, technological progress, etc. But the importance of the Scandinavian view, based upon a long experience in a social program of unemploy' Socialdefartementet:

Betankande,

of. cit., pp. 59-60.

CONCLUSIONS

129

ment relief, is that potential—if not existing—unemployment creates a need for national organization having permanency and continuity. Our monetary and credit structure has, on the one hand, produced a complete interdependence of our economic structure of nation-wide scope and also an interrelation of years of prosperity and of depression. It follows that the view which the Scandinavian countries have developed is logically sound, and the view which has characterized our own practice in this country is fallacious. In my opinion this bifocal organization, together with its continuous operation (as seen most fully developed in Sweden), is fundamental in achieving such success as may be attributed to the Scandinavian program. This is true since such an organization is consistent with the nature of the problem presented in unemployment. The increasing size of the producing unit in industry, with an everwidening market for its output, has meant that seasonal, cyclical, and technological disturbances of employment become national rather than local. In other words, the phenomenon of mass unemployment is but the counterpart of the scale of present-day production. Consequently, if a program of unemployment relief is to be undertaken successfully, a high degree of centralization is necessitated by virtue of which the organization is given scope and function commensurate with mass unemployment. In this centralization and continuity of administration is found not only a greater degree of coordination of the different parts of the relief program, but also the synchronization of social measures for the relief of the unemployed. Strik-

130

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

ingly clear is the soundness of such an approach as one finds it in the Swedish public works program under the highly centralized authority of the National Unemployment Commission; and equally weak is the approach of the Danish system with its decentralization of public works by attempting to subsidize private industrial organizations. Only by centralization of administration can the scope, the kind, the place, and the time of public projects be undertaken in accordance with the nature of unemployment that has developed. As for the continuity of the functioning of the centralized administration, it is by a permanently and continually functioning central administration that public projects for the relief of unemployment can be properly synchronized. T h e place of public works and the possibility of advanced planning of such works is, of course, a controversial question. Nevertheless it may be asserted that with increasing elements of economic friction and inflexibility, with consequent maladjustment and unemployment, there will be increasing pressure for public projects to be used as a balance in the irregularity of private industry. If this demand is to be met it can be done with the greatest degree of effectiveness only by recognizing that in public works there exists a continuous and highly centralized social function. It was mentioned above that the bifocal organization of unemployment relief as found in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden possessed a decentralized supervision as expressed in the public labor exchanges. In my judgment this part of the unemployment relief structure is of equal

CONCLUSIONS

131

importance with that of centralized administration in accounting for such effectiveness as the Scandinavian program has achieved. In keeping with any program of rehabilitation, aid to the unemployed finds its result in the reaction of the program on the individual worker. 6 Demoralization of the worker, or the indifference of the public, will both be destructive in accomplishing the object of the relief program. T h i s has been largely eliminated by the system of public labor exchanges and local unemployment committees which serve as a liaison between the individual and the Government. T h e r e has been a notable effectiveness of this part of the administration in Scandinavia, and I found no substantiation, either from employers or from government officials, for Professor Heckscher's charge 7 that public relief projects had created a body of professional relief workers. In no other way than by the decentralized, supervisory structure furnished by public labor exchanges and collaborating with local unemployment committees could the assembling of information, the unifying of social policy, the promptness of action, the shifting of worker from idleness to public employment, and from public employment to normal private work be accomplished. T h e fourth conclusion which it seems to me can be made, not only on the basis of our discussion of the administration of the relief program, but more especially from the appraisal of that program by the Scandinavian * What Sir William Beveridge in his Causes and Cures of Unemployment (London, 1931) terms "the administrative factor in unemployment." 'Cf., I.L.I., Vol. X X V I , No. i i , 18 June 1928, p. 457.

132

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

workers, concerns public works as a measure of relief. The extensive experience of the Swedish Government with public works clearly points out that the effective administration of such works toward the accomplishment of the purpose of relief is vastly more difficult than is generally realized. In fact, under conditions which are undoubtedly most favorable, as is the case in Sweden,8 extremely sharp criticism is found, which has raised fundamental issues that have not been solved and possibly must be recognized as weaknesses inherent in public works as a method of relief. And this, it should be emphasized, is true from the purely administrative point of view and quite aside from the further difficulties presented by theoretical aspects of the question, such as, for example, whether or not public work counteracts the economic readjustment necessary to reduce costs and expand employment, or again, the incidence of the cost of public work and the effect of this upon the price structure. The criticism directed by workers against the basic principles which have guided the Unemployment Commission in its public enterprises, I am satisfied from interviews with Swedish workers and their leaders, cannot be ignored. The objection which they most frequently emphasized is that the selection of the projects and their 8 Due to such factors as governmental possession of a relatively large proportion of national resources as well as the ownership and operation of such industries as railways, telephone, and telegraph, a broad and diversified scope of public projects is always open. Then, too, such factors as unjty of race and social point of view, together with an esfrit de corps in government and social life, which is more natural to a small, old nation than to other countries, are undoubtedly helpful to the success of the collectivism required in public works.

CONCLUSIONS

133

operation have led to public works being suitable only for unskilled manual labor. The compulsion to accept such work (through the test of "willingness to work" in order to receive public aid) is detrimental to all other types of workers than the unskilled. The resulting separation from their normal work, not only because of the geographical distance, but also because of the occupational difference, is necessarily destructive to the skilled worker.9 It seems to me that the Government has not faced frankly the alternatives which must be accepted: either, on the one hand, fully to admit that public relief works are limited in their usefulness to the manual laborers and, therefore, inadequate} or, on the other hand, to extend widely the scope of public works, not only in number but also in kind, so as to give a fuller range of occupational activity.10 The former of these two alternatives would mean a recasting of the cash-relief policy and the extending of this form of relief or the introduction of governmentally subsidized unemployment insurance} the latter would involve the difficulty of the probable absorption of capital and of labor from the competitive industrial * Destructive in loss of dexterity, loss of touch with the changes in the labor market in his own particular community (which is very important to a specialized worker in an occupation which is highly localized), and loss of trade interest and spirit that naturally occurs when a skilled worker must work in an entirely different surrounding at an occupation distinctly below his mental ability. As much as employers and government officials can rationalize on these questions of the public works program, the fact remains that these weaknesses are fundamental. 10 For the percentage of the unemployed which public work projects have been able to take care of, see Table VIII and the material presented in Chap. IV.

134

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

market, and thereby not only retarding progress (from a longer-time point of view) in private industry, but also offsetting the gain in public activity by the loss in individual enterprises. Further support of my conclusion that the effective administration of public works as a relief measure is much more difficult than has been realized, is found in the question of the wage policy to be pursued in connection with public projects. W e have seen the indecisive practice of the Swedish Unemployment Commission, and finally the policy of paying wages according to the open-market rates which have been adopted for the very large public works projects which are now being undertaken, or will be carried on in the near future. The theorist would readily point out the difficulty which this presents, that this policy will maintain the wage level which has been developed by collective bargaining and will thereby prevent the economic readjustment, necessitated by the changing price and cost levels as well as industrial technique, to that economic equilibrium which gives the fullest utilization of labor and capital. In other words, unemployment is prima facie evidence of such equilibration being obstructed, and a rigid wage structure created by collective agreements is one of the most important obstructions. On the other hand, the refusal of the government to accede to the demand of the workers for such a wage policy leads to the emphatic opposition of the workers, so clearly stated by the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions, that the social policy is destructive of the institution of collective bargaining which the government itself has fully recognized.

CONCLUSIONS

135

The fifth conclusion brought out by the work of the Scandinavian nations in unemployment relief is that unemployment insurance can play but a very restricted rôle in periods of heavy unemployment, and soon becomes inseparably interwoven with outright cash-relief payments through the process of liberalizing the provisions under which benefits are received, and also by the exhaustion of rights to benefit under the insurance plan, with the consequent increase of support through emergency grants by the national Government. The experience of Denmark and Norway with voluntary unemployment insurance and the careful examination of the Swedish Department of Social Affairs into the further possibilities of compulsory insurance against unemployment would clearly suggest much greater limitations in the effectiveness of this form of relief than one would conclude to be true from current discussions by writers in the field of labor. These are the conclusions that pertain to the administrative aspect of the unemployment relief program which can be drawn from the experience of the Scandinavian countries. What now may be considered as the broader social implications to which that experience points, and what light do these implications and that experience throw upon the problem of unemployment relief in our own country? In closing, it is to this we shall now turn. 2. The Social Implications of the Unemployment Relief Program In the first place, unemployment relief as a social, governmental function is definitely put before us as a recog-

136

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT

nized and accepted fact in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. This is due to several factors, the most direct of which is probably the very much greater immobility of labor—an immobility caused largely by organization of workers, on the one hand, and the relative scarcity of resources with the resultant restriction in the range and number of openings for workers. In addition to this the unitary form of government of course facilitates the carrying on of the program of relief. More than this, however, there is an admission that the causes of unemployment—whether seasonal, cyclical, or technological—are not only those over which the worker has no control, but also concerning which there is such a high degree of uncertainty in occurrence that collective rather than individual provision must be made. This point of view, which is merely one aspect of the general collectivism of these smaller nations, stands in sharp contrast with the social mentality in the United States. Faced with the purely objective economic analysis which is back of the recognition in Scandinavia of the impossibility of the individual to control or to provide for unemployment, is a social philosophy differing in an important degree from the typical American individualism. It finds expression in the parliamentary committee's report in the words quoted above: . . [in] modern society . . . there will always be a certain group of persons which is unemployed. Obviously the individual suffers equally as much from unemployment and is in just as great need of help whether the total of the unemployed is large or small. It therefore follows that the need of

CONCLUSIONS

137

unemployment relief activity always exists." One finds nowhere in this country the same concern regarding unemployment relief that has made the question a national issue in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. In my opinion it follows from these factors—economic, governmental, and psychological—that we shall not, at least for some time to come, recognize unemployment as a problem calling for a combined, socially coordinated and centralized system of relief. Secondly, the Scandinavian experience has clearly demonstrated thfe complexity of the problem of unemployment relief, and has shown that the problem presents a set of interrelated social questions concerning assistance to the worker, training for the youth, and support of the poor. Hence the real limitations of unemployment insurance or of public works have been more clearly defined. Until such delimitation and definition is recognized, the writings and pronouncements on the subject of unemployment relief in this country will continue to claim for one measure or another far more than it can accomplish, and will thereby retard a constructive approach to meeting the great question presented by unemployment. Thirdly, lying back of the administrative problems of the relief of unemployment, but inseparably connected with them are controversial, theoretical questions. One of these is the causes of unemployment. Probably with very few other problems in the field of economics does economic theory show a closer connection to economic practice than in that of unemployment relief. Particularly clear is this of public works as a relief measure. If this

138

SCANDINAVIAN U N E M P L O Y M E N T

measure is to be efficacious for relief purposes it is obvious that public projects must expand at a time and rate comparable to the contraction of private work. This in turn calls for some understanding of the occurrence of such contraction in advancey inasmuch as mass unemployment requires most extensive governmental undertakings, their planning, administration, and financing. This obviously necessitates a body of established theory relative to economic sequences, friction, maladjustment, and technological progress upon which to proceed. In the absence of this, public works (and unemployment insurance, as well) become a matter of plunging in with lack of effective timing, administration, scope, distribution, and financing of such works. But more than the theory of the causes of unemployment and the prediction of its occurrence, the administration of unemployment relief necessarily puts before one other theoretical aspects of the problem. This is very clearly seen in the Swedish program of public works in which more and more pressure of workers' organizations has been brought to bear on the Government to undertake projects having a full scope of occupational diversity, employing the skilled as well as the unskilled, and to whom would be paid a wage rate approaching if not equivalent to the collective agreement rates. Obviously this tends to perpetuate the maladjustment which has been in part produced by the institution of collective bargaining setting up an economic inflexibility that created unemployment, and especially so in the export industries where cost and price level must meet an equilibrium de-

CONCLUSIONS

139

termined to a large degree by competitive economic forces. 11 Precisely the same economic inflexibility and price and cost rigidity have been produced in Germany as a result of the cartelization of industry. 12 One might add parenthetically that the same inflexibility of costs in American industry, as a result of the "codes" under the N.R.A. program with the consequent possible increase of unemployment in our export industries, would logically be suggested. T o what extent the administration of unemployment relief counteracts necessary economic readjustment, by creating an inflexibility in the wage and capital structure, must be considered in the evaluation one makes of the effectiveness of "relief" measures. Again the relief of mass unemployment becomes inseparably connected with monetary and credit theory. At the present time, in the case of Sweden, price stabilization and the "managed currency" scheme have become a part of the unemployment relief program through the financing which the latter program involves. The question might well be asked whether unemployment relief or inflation, or both, is the end toward which the administration of the public works will be directed in this country. It is clear from this that the social plan for relieving unemployment cannot be dealt with independently, but 11 This is not, of course, to be construed as a condemnation of collective bargaining, or, indeed, of unionism as a whole! I merely wish to stress the direct relation of the theoretical consideration to administrative practice. u C f . University of Chicago Harris Foundation Lectures, 1 9 3 1 . Unemployment as a World Problem, (Chicago, 1 9 3 1 ) . See lecture, "World Unemployment and its Problem."

140

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

in its treatment it becomes a part of a larger field of social theorizing 1 3 and action. T o confine one's attention to the administrative aspects of the various phases of the probl e m — a s important and as difficult as these are—is to see but a part of the whole question. Such then has been the experience of the Scandinavian countries with unemployment relief—an experience which has been productive in more closely defining the problems and issues involved in mass unemployment. Public administration, social controversy, parliamentary investigations have all played a part, and the general outcome has been an acknowledgment of allevation for the unemployed as a continuous governmental function. If this viewpoint gains acceptance, the experiment of the Scandinavian nations with this problem of relief points to the basic elements of interdependence, centralization, and continuity which the social unemployment relief organization must possess if that social function is to be performed. But more than this the experiment has clarified the nature of the relief problem as being closely interrelated with other social economic questions of practice and theory. U n e m ployment relief must, therefore, be seen not as a unitary but rather as a multiple problem. u Apropos of this, another illustration is afforded in the interpretation of the general principle of the public-works program that projects undertaken by the government should be productive work of "general economic value." T h e question of defining what is "productive" becomes a subjective matter and open to much difference of opinion. ( C f . Professor Bertil Ohlin, "P.M. Med vissa synfunkier pa fragan om produktivitetsbegreppels innebord," in a report of a parliamentary committee entitled " Angdende Beredskapsarbeten till Motverkande av Arbetsloshet," Stockholm, 1933.)

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A T H E ORGANIZATION O F T H E MINISTRY OF SOCIAL AFFAIRS, T H E NATIONAL U N E M P L O Y M E N T COMMISSION, AND T H E PUBLIC LABOR EXCHANGE SYSTEM OF SWEDEN I. The Ministry of Social A fairs H E importance of the element of organization in the effectuating of a social program can scarcely be overemphasized. It seems desirable, therefore, to give a clearer picture of the three governmental structures to which such frequent references have been made in the course of the discussion of the preceding chapters. These three governmental structures are the Ministry (or Department) of Social Affairs, the National Unemployment Commission, and the Public Labor Exchange. The Unemployment Commission functions in one part of the whole field over which the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Social Affairs extends, and a comprehensive view of the working of the governmental machinery in the field of unemployment relief in Sweden necessitates an understanding of the sphere of the Ministry of Social Affairs as a whole. It should also be added that similar departments are found in the Danish and Norwegian governments, which have essentially the same function and structure. The administrative scope of this Ministry is more extensive than the title indicates, inasmuch as it covers a considerable part of the field assigned to the Ministry, or Department, of the Interior in other countries. Of the three main divisions, namely, poor relief and child welfare; social matters, hygiene and care of the sick; and local administration, police, etc., that of the second (social matters) is of major importance. In this division there are several national, central boards of administration. They are the Medical Board, Unemployment Com143

144

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

mission, State Building Bureau, Labor Council, Labor Court, Social Board, Delegation of International Cooperation, Insurance Council, State Insurance Office, and the Pension Board. It is apparent, therefore, that the Ministry of Social Affairs has a broad field of activity. Now to consider the field of the Social Board, with whose field our investigation has been more directly concerned. This Board (Socialstyrelsen) is headed by a Director-General (Dr. Gunnar Huss) who is the final administrative authority for the Board. T h e activities are grouped into six bureaux. T w o of these are charged with the duty of gathering and reporting official social statistics, and one is concerned with problems of a legislative character. T h e administrative business of the Board is carried on by the other three bureaux according to the following organization: " T h e First Bureau" concerns itself with public and private labor exchanges, arbitration and labor conflicts, emigration and immigration, the care of inebriates, and related problems. " T h e Second Bureau" treats with matters concerning protection of workers. This field has to do with the enforcement of legislation relating to employment of minors and of women, prevention of accidents and industrial diseases, restriction of working hours, factory inspection, and inspection of ships. " T h e Third Bureau" deals with social insurance and sickness benefit societies.1 This, in brief, is the structure of the Ministry of Social Affairs as a whole, and of the Social Board in particular. No attempt is made here to indicate the scope of each of the number of fields encompassed by the Department, nor of the numerous interrelations of the Ministry, or its Boards, to other governmental organizations both of a national and international character. An interesting illustration of the latter type is found in the "Delegation for International Cooperation," to which reference has been made above. While this organization may be regarded as a national, central board inasmuch as it has a permanent structure to deal with an independent field of activity, the head of the Social Board acts as the chairman of the Delegation. T h e field 1

Royal Social Board, Social Works and Legislation in Sweden—Survey Published by Order of Swedish Government, Stockholm 1918, pp. 16-31 and fassim.

APPENDIX A of work is that connected with Sweden's membership in the International Labor Organization of the League of Nations. The growth of the work of the national government in the field of social affairs has been rapid. Practically the entire development of organization and functions which have been indicated has come during the last few decades, the Social Board having been established in 1 9 1 2 . The rate of this growth and the scope of its activities are indicative of the response of a sensitive social democracy in the Scandinavian countries to a social economic problem such as unemployment relief. 2. The National Unemployment Commission Anticipating the development of extensive unemployment, the Swedish Government, on August 10, 1 9 1 4 , created the State Unemployment Commission (Statens Arbetsloshctskommission) to "cooperate with the Ministry of Social Affairs to suggest measures to counteract the expected unemployment and to ameliorate the effect of the same." Neither the method of procedure nor the authority of the Commission was designated other than that it was to work with the Ministry of the Interior as an advisory body. In September 1 9 1 4 the Commission was instructed by the Riksdag to give advice to provincial and communal relief committees. From then on it has been recognized as a central organization for unemployment relief. At the same time the Commission was requested to cooperate with the Social Board concerning matters of employer-worker relationship and of the labor market. This was the development of the central organization. T h e local administration of the Unemployment Commission originated as a result of a circular letter in 1 9 1 4 by the Commission to the provincial governments, requesting them to set up authorities in such places as was necessary in order to counteract unemployment, and to administer the relief of need which might arise. The resulting "Communal Unemployment and Relief Committees" (kommunala arbetsloshets—och hjalfkommitteer) which were established had chairmen appointed by the respective provincial governments. These committees were charged with the responsibility of utilizing and account-

146

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

ing f o r the funds placed at their disposal. T h e number of

these

committees by the end of 1 9 1 4 had reached 4 1 7 . The

"provincial

relief

committees"

(lànshjâlpkommittéer)

were

charged with the obligation of taking "measures which in the main are found applicable f o r counteracting unemployment in the province." A monthly report to the Social Board was required of these committees. From this origin in 1 9 1 4 , the organization of the State Unemployment Commission rapidly developed. Its national focus is the Commission, the direct administrative body of which is the "Employment Committee"

(Arbetsutskott). T h i s Committee is composed of

three

divisions, namely, the office, the technical, and the "social counselors" (sociala ombud),

into which the activities of the Unemployment Com-

mission naturally subdivide. These three divisions have direct supervision of the three subordinate divisions composed of the "provincial relief committees," the "South Sweden Public Enterprises," and the " N o r t h Sweden Public Enterprises." In turn, the "provincial relief committees" have charge of the numerous "communal relief committ e e s " ; the "South Sweden Public Enterprises" divisional office has the supervision over seven districts; and the " N o r t h Sweden Public Enterprises" has direction over four districts. Finally, these eleven district offices are in the immediate control of the governmental relief enterprises which are in operation. 2 For the organization of relief-work enterprises, originally the initiative had to be taken by the commune concerned, but in order to obtain state aid (ordinarily amounting to one-half of the expenditure) it was necessary to secure approval from the Unemployment

Com-

mission. 3 T o this in more recent years have been added enterprises directly undertaken by the Commission, as we have seen in Chapter I V . T h e relative importance of these types of projects has been given in Table X I , Chapter V I I , p. 1 0 0 . It might be stated, parenthetically, that the development of our present American public-works program

has a direct parallel

' S tat em Arbetslôshetskommission, Dei Svenska Samhallet och lôsheten, 1914-1914, Stockholm 1929, Part I, Chap. 2. * Social Works and Legislation in Sweden, of. cit., p. J4.

with Arbets-

APPENDIX A

147

that of the Swedish experience. T h e communal projects, the U n e m ployment Commission's projects, and the State-commune are comparable in type to municipal, to Public Works Administration, and to Civil Works Administration enterprises, respectively, in this country. It is interesting to note, in this connection, that precisely the same basic questions are beginning to arise in our own unemployment relief program which have developed in the two decades of the Swedish experiment in this field. T h e status of the State Unemployment Commission cannot, at this time, be definitely determined. Parliamentary investigating committees — t o say nothing of the general public, the employers and organized labor—have

recommended

its continuance and also its dissolution,

have praised it and have severely criticized it. 4 It would seem, nevertheless, that from its inception it has acquired further authority and will remain a part of the Swedish social economic structure. 3. The- Public Labor

Exchanges

In the functioning of the unemployment relief work of the Scandinavian countries, the public labor exchanges have played an important role. In fact a committee of the Ministry of Social Affairs of the Swedish Government stated, as early as 1922, that "among measures public

ex-

change system is under all conditions the most important". A

for the counteracting of

unemployment,

an organized

de-

centralized organization for the purpose of direct administration and supervision has undoubtedly been quite as important as a centralized structure for the formulation of policy and general program. W h i l e the latter is the realm of the Ministry of Social Affairs (and more directly, in Sweden, the National Unemployment Commission), the 1 In October 1933 the membership of the Commission was increased from three to seven. The workers' representatives had resigned in 1926 as a protest against the decision of Parliament not to grant unemployment relief during disputes. This decision having been modified, the Confederation of Trade Unions has decided to end its opposition to the Commission. T w o of the newly appointed members are representatives of the workers and two are from the employers. (Socíala Meddelanden, Oct. 1933, l-L-l; Vol. XLIII, No. 8, p. 243.)

148

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

former is the field of the public labor exchanges. T h e function of this decentralized structure in the relief program as a whole can better be understood in light of its historical development. T h e first consideration of labor exchanges in Sweden occurred in 1 8 9 ; , by a government committee appointed to suggest measures f o r the diminution of unemployment. It was recommended that such exchanges should operate through the poor relief organization together with societies engaged in charitable work. At the same time the communes should exercise regulation and grant financial aid. Parliamentary views were divided and the initiative came from the local rather than national side. 5 In April 1 9 0 0 the town of Halsingborg proposed the establishment of a municipal labor exchange. T h i s action was prompted by the example of Copenhagen and Christiania, which had established municipal labor exchanges as a result of

the experience of

Switzerland and

southern Germany. T h e Halsingborg labor exchange opened in October 1 9 0 2 and was followed by similar action on the part of other cities. In the next five years ten cities had established municipal labor exchanges. It was urged upon the national government that a unified organization be developed through the assistance of the State. In 1 9 0 6 the National Board of T r a d e (kommerskollegium) called the first national public labor exchange conference for the formulating of a unified and standardized system of records and methods of operation. T h e n on September 2 0 , 1 9 0 7 , the Government

commissioned

the Board of T r a d e " t o direct, supervise, and promote public labor exchanges throughout the country." 6 With this the public labor exchange system may be said to have been founded. U p to this time public labor exchange offices had been established through the initiative of larger cities. In 1 9 0 6 , however, the legislature of one province (Ostergotland) appointed a committee to work out a plan by which a public system of labor exchange could be established * Socialdefartementet: Betdnkande och Forslag Angaende Ofentlig Arbetsformedling och Statsbidrag till Arbetsloshetskanor. Stalent OjfcntItga Utredntngar 1922:59. Stockholm 1922, p. 28. ' Ibid., pp. 29-30.

APPENDIX A

149

for the province as a whole. T h i s was accomplished and went into effect April I, 1908. T h e consequence was similar action by the other provinces. T h e function which the public labor exchange system at once began to perform is indicated in the high percentage of available jobs which were filled by one of the municipal labor exchanges. T h e results achieved in GSteborg are given in the following table:

TABLE XII SURVEY o r

THE

FIRST TEN TEARS OF WORK OF THE

OÖTEBORO PUBLIC LABOR EXCHANGE

Year

Requests for Workers

190a

a,310

1903 1904 »9°S

ii.163 14.383 '4i7i4 I7.037 17.149 22.833 24,3«6

1906 1907

1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 Total...

20,171 16,868 16,040 181,134

Workers Percentage of the Seeking Open Places Which Work Were Filled

a, 102 12,490 11,283 11,481

9°

H.S94

63 61

11,089 16,62$ 18,489 16,891 12,567

80 66 65

67 68 70

11.039

73 7»

135.6JO

68

Source: Sociala Mtddclanden, Arg. 1912, Haften 7-1 a, Stockholm, pp. 870-871. Another aspect of the function performed by the public labor exchange is not indicated above. T h e increasing influx of rural workers to the cities caused an added maladjustment in the labor market which accentuated the problem of unemployment and its relief in the cities and, at the same time, aggravated the seasonal shortage of work in

150

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

the rural communities. For the period 1 9 0 2 - 1 9 2 1 the labor exchange system of the country had

filled

460,000 jobs in agriculture and

forestry which amounted to one-fourth o f all places filled by the public labor offices. 7 W h i l e this occupational and geographical redistribution of labor, involved in the shift of workers from rural to urban communities has not o f course been unique to Sweden, it is true, nevertheless, that this shifting has incurred a greater unemployment burden to that country. T h e high degree o f seasonality o f rural work in a northerly country together with the severity of the winters retarding public relief works have added to the importance of the labor exchange system. A t present a complete net-work of public labor offices exists. Each province has its provincial office which is charged with the administration of the labor offices in its province. T o the provincial office are connected the several affiliated offices. A

complete record of

work

available in the various trades is published and constant and direct communication is maintained between these offices. T h e country has been divided into six districts. Weekly reports o f vacancies are sent to these district offices. O n the basis of these, the Ministry of Social Affairs prepares each week a national list of vacancies. A governmental committee in 1922 brought in the recommendation that the public labor exchanges maintain their municipal character inasmuch as their work is essentially local. T h e State should, however, control and finance the work. T h e Committee declared that the G o v ernment, through its Ministry o f Social Affairs, should not only support the activity of the labor exchange system but also give unified leadership of a non-partisan character, labor exchange service without charge to workers of all kinds, and carry on without regard to industrial conflicts. 8 T h e r e are now 133 offices in Sweden with branch offices where such are needed. Each of these offices is directed by a council the membership of which is composed of an equal number of employers and employees with a neutral chairman. T h e number o f representatives on * Socialdefartementet, 'Ibid., p. 33.

of. cit., p. 31.

APPENDIX each council must be at least

five.

A

151

T h e services of

the labor

ex-

change are rendered to workers in all occupations without charge. The

financing

of the system is met by the commune, the county,

and the State jointly. T h e proportion contributed by the State varies. T o take the three years 1 9 1 9 - 1 9 2 1 , the State contributed

105,000,

122,630, and 2 1 7 , 5 0 4 crowns. These yearly amounts contributed by the national government amounted to 12.6, 1 1 . 2 , and 1 7 . 7 percent, respectively, based partly upon the normal requirements o f the past year. In part too the national government takes up the slack of an unusual burden which must be met. T h i s was the case in the larger contribution in 1 9 2 1 . It was necessitated by special exchanges being established for seamen in that year in view o f the heavy unemployment existing in that particular occupation. T h e distribution o f the costs involved in the operation of the public labor exchanges is indicated in T a b l e X I I I . W h i l e these figures are f o r 1 9 2 1 , they may be accepted as indicating the usual relative weight o f the expense items: 9 As we have noted above, the State contributed 2 1 7 , 5 0 4 K r . or 1 7 . 7 per cent of the cost for that year. T h e expenditure for the operation of the public labor exchange system ha? increased markedly as years have passed. T h e

increased

number of offices within the system, increased scope of activity, and increased salaries o f the personnel have accounted f o r this. From 10,500 Kr. as the total cost in 1902, the expenditure in 1 9 1 5 had reached 375,000 K r . D u r i n g the years 1 9 1 6 - 1 9 2 1 , the yearly expense for the public labor exchange was 4 0 2 , 5 0 0 ; 1,099,500 and

456,700;

639,000;

833,900;

1,228,600 crowns respectively. In the more

recent

years o f 1 9 2 4 - 1 9 2 9 the yearly cost (in crowns) o f operating the public labor exchange system, was 995,684; 1,044,937,

and

1,037,439;

1,007,685;

1,000,703;

I . 0 5 3 . I 3 7 respectively. 1 0

'Ibid., p. 38. T h i s table does not include the repayment by the labor exchange system of an outstanding loan. It, therefore, does not agree with the 1,228,600 Kr. given above for 1921. 10 See the monthly numbers of Sociala Meddelanden (usually No. 9 of each year) under section entitled "De offentliga arbelsformedltngsanstalternas inkomster och utgifter."

152

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

T A B L E XIII T H E D I S T R I B U T I O N OF T H E C O S T OF O P E R A T I N G THE PUBLIC LABOR S Y S T E M OF S W E D E N (FOR

EXCHANGE

I921)

The Nature of the Expenditure

The Cost (in Krs.)

Postage, telegraph, telephone and printing of blank forms. Salaries of personnel for the special exchanges in agriculture and shipping occupations Grant for traveling expense of workers Salaries of personnel for the main offices of the labor exchange system Salaries for personnel other than the above Printing, stationery, advertisements, traveling expense of officials, etc Offices, heat, and light Total Source: Socialdepartementet Betankande och For slag Angacndc Offcntliga Arbetsfbrmedling och Statsbidrag till Arbctsldihctskassor. Statens Offtntliga XJtredningar, 1922:59, p. 38. A t the beginning o f 1 9 3 1 there w e r e 36 main offices in the system as a w h o l e , 24 being provincial offices and 1 2 communal offices o f an independent type. In addition to these there were 9 9 branch offices and 2 4 special offices ( f o r seamen), w h i c h made a total o f 1 5 9 units. Besides these regular offices labor exchange representatives (arbetsformedlingsombud) were

are maintained w h e r e need requires. D u r i n g 1 9 3 1 ,

appointed

to

work

under

the

leadership

of

250

the

respective

a labor exchange system is, of

course, to

provinces. 1 1 The

main f u n c t i o n o f

bring the supply o f labor and demand for it together. T h i s expresses itself in the applications f o r work on the one hand and the available places on the other. T h e effectiveness with w h i c h the labor exchange operates is measured in the percentage of available places w h i c h the u

Sociala Meddelanden,

Nr. 2, 1932, p. 113.

APPENDIX A

153

exchange is able to fill. It is also indicatd by the willingness of the workers to make use of the labor exchange, which may be seen in the governmental reports on the public labor exchange system in the figures giving the "applicants per 100 available places." T h e latter is also a good index of the degree of unemployment since it is a ratio of "applications for work" to "available places." Table No. X I X in Appendix C, pp. 1 7 0 - 1 7 7 , gives a complete statistical record of the functioning of the labor exchange system of Sweden.

APPENDIX B SCANDINAVIAN

"COLLECTIVISM"

I. General

T

H R O U G H O U T the discussion of the foregoing chapters, the reader has been aware of my references to elements in the social economic fabric of Scandinavia which have an important bearing upon such a program as unemployment relief. I have, for example, in Chapter I referred to the Scandinavian countries as constituting a "highly sensitive social democracy"; in Chapter V, attention was called to the fact that workers through their parliamentary committee demand that public relief works should not be regarded as a form of relief to the unemployed but as a rationalization measure ( r a t i o n a l i i e r i n g i a t g a r d ) ; and again, in Chapter VI, that Scandinavian employers in their appraisal of the governmental unemployment relief program share with other social groups the general acceptance in those countries of collectivism in the social economic structure.

T h e economist would be prone on the one hand to dispose of this social mentality of "collectivism" as non-economic and incommensurable in character, or on the other hand to accept as a measurement of this element of collectivism in the Scandinavian economic situation such data as unionization, employers' collaboration, and governmental ownership of means of production. This, indeed, would be a fundamental misinterpretation of this element in the politico-economic l i f e of these countries. No concrete simple measurement of this force can be found unless one takes as an approximation of it the development and complete recognition of collective agreements (the institution of kollektivavtal) which, in the extent to which it has gone, is confined to Sweden. In an examination of the Scandinavian unemployment relief pro154

APPENDIX B

155

gram and the conclusions to which one comes, it is clear that the social mentality of collectivism should be given due weight. Whatever degree of success may be achieved in this "economic laboratory" which Scandinavia may be said to furnish the larger industrial nations, in a social economic program—such as unemployment relief—the question can at once be raised of the bearing which this collectivism has had in that outcome. Or again, a question of another sort might well be put: Is not this collectivism the natural consequence of the Government having undertaken a nation-wide program, rather than the spirit of collectivism calling forth the governmental activity? Which is cause and which is effect? T o avoid superficial or naïve generalizations it must be clearly seen that the questions which have been raised cannot be ignored or answered categorically. For this reason, it has been my purpose throughout my discussion to call attention to this element in the situation, and thereby at least guard against unwarranted interpretations and conclusions which the conciseness of my writing has invited. It is unnecessary to say that the type of the problem to which I refer in this element of collectivism in the Scandinavian economic structure is present in any analysis of an international question or in the drawing of comparisons on an international basis. T o take but one striking illustration, one may cite the misinterpretations which are to be found in the very interesting book Les États-Unis d'aujourd'hui by one who is as skillful as André Siegfried and who has had unusually extensive experience in interpreting national institutions and forces. With particular reference to the problem of interpreting Scandinavian economic phenomena, I have found the same difficulty and weakness in the writings of those who have attempted an evaluation of some question in the Scandinavian countries. It has been especially true, it seems to me, of some of the treatises by German research students in their analysis of the Swedish social economic movements. Their interpretation of what I have referred to as collectivism, in terms of socialism is basically erroneous. It brings to bear on the Scandinavian

156

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

situation a Germanic state socialism that is, in my opinion, about as far afield as Marxism or Communism would be. A nearer approach to the true nature of collectivism in these countries is seen in the interesting article by Marquis W. Childs, "Sweden: Where Capitalism is Controlled," which appeared in the November 1933 number of Harfers Magazine. While I completely disagree with Mr. Childs in his statement that "the Scandinavian countries in their present development stand midway between the uncontrolled capitalism of America before the crash and the arbitrary Marxian communism of Russia before the Stalin modifications of a year ago," it is, however, true that he touches upon a fundamental aspect of the development when he states, "remarkably enough, this process of education has touched even the point of view of the capitalist and to such a degree that he has, in certain instances, it is said, lent his support to the movement to strengthen the domestic economy along cooperative lines." Scandinavian collectivism furnishes the economic historian and the sociologist an intriguing chapter which, to my knowledge, has not been written. The provocative suggestion made by Mr. Childs that Scandinavia, and Sweden in particular, has achieved a "planned domestic economy" toward which the United States is working under the Roosevelt program and the N.R.A., challenges the economic historian to an examination of the nature of this collectivism which, by a totally different process than is the case of our own legislative, N.R.A. method, is developing—at least to a degree—into a "planned" economy. By those who have not sensed the spirit of Scandinavian "collectivism" or "solidarity," it might be held that this phenomenon in the social economic structure of Scandinavia is but another application of that general movement toward economic centralization which manifests itself in various forms, for example in Italy in the direction of the "stato corporativo Fascista." The peculiar importance of the institution of collective bargaining (kollektivactal) which has developed to such an extent as it has in Sweden suggests that in the idea of syndicalism one finds the source of Scandinavian collectivism which, in

APPENDIX B

157

fact, is the root of the Italian economic centralization. This certainly is not the case but, whatever the source, the dominant place which the institution of collective bargaining has held f o r such a long time in the economy of Scandinavia makes it desirable to give a brief explanation of that institution. It has been an important element in the policy and practice of the governmental unemployment relief program. That program would not have been the same, either in its nature or its outcome, in the absence of highly developed collective bargaining. 2. Collective Agreements T h e outstanding feature of the employment situation of Sweden is the great degree of organization both on the side of the workers and that of the employers. As a consequence, or coincidence, has come the settlement of questions of employment by the method of agreements drawn up jointly by union organizations and employers' f e d erations. T h e interest in developing this method, strangely enough, has been as great on the side of the latter as the former. This acceptance, in Sweden, has been due in part to the responsible leadership of labor in that country, and more especially to the guidance and vision furnished the labor movement by the late Hjalmar Branting. His social and enlightened point of view won for the organized workers the esteem of the employing class. T o consider Sweden in particular. For the past couple of decades more than half of the total number of industrial workers of the country have had their hours and conditions of work determined by collective agreement. There has t e e n an increasing inclusiveness of these agreements both in the numbers of workers covered and the geographical area involved. From Table X X I I of the statistical appendix (p. 1 8 8 ) it may be seen that of the 580,931 workers brought into collective agreement in 1 9 3 0 - 1 9 3 1 , 3 8 . 5 % of them were within agreements nation-wide in scope. Another important feature of such collective agreements has been a distinct trend toward shortening the period of their duration. T h i s is brought out in Table X X I I I (p. 1 8 9 ) in which it can be noted that

158

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

the agreement exceeding two years in length has practically dropped out since 1920. Indicative of the permanent character o f these agreements in the collectivistic economy o f Sweden is the 1 9 2 8 law making such agreements legal. A " L a b o r C o u r t " was set up for enforcement. T h i s legislation fixes the legal consequences f o r non-observance. T h e

general

legal principles governing

judicial

damages hold,

but the ordinary

procedure o f imposing imprisonment in default of payment o f a fine is not applied by the Labor C o u r t . Legislation

has also provided

f o r "Special Arbitrators"

of

whom

there are now seven, selected by the Government f r o m the judges in the d i f f e r e n t parts o f

the

country. T h e y

act

as mediators

and

report

periodically to the Board of Social Affairs. T h e latter has instituted a special bureau, " T h e Mediation Office," where statistical information relative to collective agreements and labor conflicts is compiled.

The

law does not establish the method to be f o l l o w e d in mediation nor is there any penalty f o r the party w h o refuses to attend a mediation meeting. Neither has the mediator the authority to prohibit the cessation of work nor the use of militant measures by labor organizations. 1 1 T h e Government of Sweden, Social Work and Legislation (Stockholm, 1 9 1 8 ) , pp. 38-45.

in Sweden,

APPENDIX C STATISTICAL TABLES XIV. Trade Union Membership and Percentage of Unemployment in Norway, 1906-1933. XV. Unemployment in Swedish Trade Unions, 1 9 1 1 - 1 9 3 3 . XVI. Employment in Danish Trade Unions, 1920-1933. XVII. Total Unemployment in Great Britain, 1 9 2 0 - 1 9 3 3 . XVIII. Index of Employment in the United States, 1 9 1 4 - 1 9 3 4 . XIX. Public Labor Exchange System in Sweden, 1 9 1 1 - 1 9 3 4 . XX. Unemployment Relief Statistics in Sweden, 1922-1934. XXI. Distribution of Total Cost of the National Public Relief Work in Sweden, 1 9 1 8 - 1 9 3 1 (per day). XXII. Collective Agreements in Sweden. XXIII. Duration of Collective Agreements in Sweden, 1908-1924 (in per cent of total number of agreements).

159

i6o

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT 9 N t

t

vt

0 «o 00

I K M

Oi M n ui

u

H !

m n

«

0 « M

»«.

oo

«ao *> o 0 0 00

S >•

t

« O MM«»0O>00>O

g 0»

H>o

0 M

o> »0 00 o nOih m m « W5 W) W) « vr> «*> t O t 900 00 O 0> 0> ©> O

K n « t m Q 0> **» O ^ t- O t ci «*it»o

11

° ° ss i i S ? •S iS -o 5 •s -S Z I ^ -3 55 o;

t »00 *"» 00 Oi O M « f»> t »00 00 o> o « ••> h-jiN.MMMCiWWMWrtflPIMnfjrO'O*'') i0>0i0i900>0i0>00i00>0>0>0>90>0>90

I o

£

APPENDIX C

161

TABLE XV U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN SWEDISH T R A D E UNIONS,

ZQII

Total Membership'

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

1912

Unemployed

No. 1

«1.550 65,330

7.408 6.800

12.0 IO.4

57,833

4.019 1.948

6.7 3 5 3.2

56.36» 53.881 48.56» 48.007 46.803 45.627 44.539 43.067

1,679 1.393 1.468 1.083 1.970 1.970 3.666

2.9 3.1 2.3 4-3 4 4 8-5

Total Membership

5o,973 53,122 53.727 SS.163 55.034 53,917 54.267 50.927 56.45« 53.836 51.531 54.34«

1914

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

6,401

10.4

58.354 64.410 63,146

4.401 4,216 3,238

6o,494 69,823

1.946 1.945 1.752 4.690

75 6.5 5« 3.2 3.1 3.0 8.1

4.751 4.953 6,089 8.870

77 8.1 10.3 15.0

59,195

1913

Unemployed

No.

%

5.646 4.450 3.483 3.891 2,044

II. I

1.769 1.545 1.383 1.635 1.927 »,913 4,591

84 65 5 2 3-7 3-3 2.8 2.7 2.9 36

Total Membership

52.774 50,392 51,031 52,735 53.186 53,38o 53.906 53.954 57.873

5-7

63.073 59,922

84

6O,535

S6.788 57.476 63.895 60.074 58.980 66,184 59.870 61,073 68.050 64.996 66,5(47 65.614

8,397 6.907 7.I30 5.121 3,935 4.169 2.377 2.179 2,390 3,473 3,018 5.084

Unemployed

No.

%

4 . 70 9 3.568 3.939 3.138

89 7-1 5 7 40 3.6

1.393 1.439 1.342 1.230 1.251 1,611 2,647 4,556

27 »5 2.3 2.2 3.6 4 4 7 5

1916

191s

61,468

58,91» 58.257 61.883 61,023 59,084

I9II-I933

14.8 13.0 II.3

64.85S 64,218 70,502

8-5 6.7 6 3 4-0 3.6

69.542 59.775 67,036 66.801

3 5 3-8

65.430 73.335 73.843

4 5 7-7

71.169 75.000

5,i8O

8.0

4.330 3.683 3.388

6.7 5 3

1.964 1.793

4 7 3.3 3.7

1.785 ».423 1.584 1.675 1.586

a.7

4.050

5 4

3.2

3.3 3 3

3.3

IÔ2

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN S W E D I S H T R A D E U N I O N S ( C o n t i n u e d )

1917

Total Membership

Jan Feb Map Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

77,101 79.174 84.436 85.330

Unemployed

No.

%

4,549 4.338

S 9 5 J 7 0 4 4 2 8 3 t

83.424 92.678 90.919

S.136 3.734 3.313 3.830 3.956

90.834 97.714 93.841 91.844 99.434

2.547 2.382 3,603 3,348 5.806

3 2 3 2 3

3 8 4 8

4 S 8

Total Membership

July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

119.7*9 109,748 126,035 114,467 121,140 126,406 134,609 133,693 150,830 142,034 146,777 145,803

9,129 8,303 S.673 3,987 3.5" 4.315 3.491 3.997 4.340 6.085 10,344 32,982

Unemployed

Total Membership

No.

%

101,978 100,530

6,133

6.0 50

110,375 107,150

109.763 106.940 108.433 110,938 109,593 103,094

5.325 5.356 4,380 5.124 4.636

4 9 SO 4.0 46 4 3

131.194 116,898 118,964 137.496

3.559 3,944 3.366

3 5 3 7 3 3

3.524 8.499

3 4 7-3

107,451 105,580 103.508 116,919

1920

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June

1919

1918

4.992

135.951 117.685 131,111 127.305 118,690 129,701

1931

7 7 4 3 3

6

5 5 s 9 3 4 3 8 3 0 3 9 4 3 7 0 IS 8

154.707 147,436 164,730

31.354 30,687 40.561

145.111 144.378

35,184 36.483 40.535 41.913 40,901

145.365 150.540 152.636 154.371 149.371 133.833 143.649

40,347 40,038 38,149 47.668

Unemployed

No.

%

8,281 8.162 10,620 8.812

7 5 7.6 8.1

7.304 5.926 4.730 3,753 4.034 4.039 4.531 9.337

7 5 6.1 46 38 32 31 3.2 38 7.3

1923

20.1 30 - 7 34 S 24. 3 35 I 27.7 37-9 27 4 37.3 37.1 38.8 33-2

140,768 137,279 149,773 139.347 128.248 138,045 149,488 131.953 132,390 135.456 126.073 128,168

48.955 44.137 45.879 39,888 29,944 27,547 39.655 31,307 30,109 18,856 31.595 27.784

34 9 31 9 30.4 28.3 33.9 30.9 20.0 16.7 15 I 15 5 17.3 31 7

APPENDIX C UNEMPLOYMENT IN SWEDISH TRADE UNIONS

1923

Total

1924

Unemployed

Total

Membership

(Continued)

1925

Unemployed

Total

MemberNo.

%

ship

Unemployed

Membership

%

No.

Jan

"3.483

»4.304

20.5

180.06s

»4.487

«

Feb

« S . 457

26,106

I9.4

186,005

23.846

13.4

6

%

No.

204,456

29,926

14

304,410

»7.934

1 3 6

8

Mar

130,222

25.678

18.O

204,125

28.133

13.9

216,282

25.824

ia.o

Apr

127.257

19,801

14

195.065

22,35s

11.6

208,330

22,437

10.8

9

May

117,718

12,521

IO.7

192,467

14.438

7

215.599

16.920

8.3

June

131,587

12,903

9.8

I4.033

7-4

»17.533

I7.709

8.2

July

126,422

12,283

9 1

I9t.95i 186,29g

11.682

6.2

»17,251

16,252

7.6

Au*

126,479

11,009

8.6

191,520

12.35»

6.6

219,362

16,728

7

Sept

135,994

I0.752

8 0

198,387

13,911

7 0

232,722

19,802

8.5

Oct

136,320

ll,OI3

8.2

205,605

17.344

8 4

333.832

23,500

10.1

Nov

«32,734 132,671

12,110

9-i 14.1

202,354

20,778

10.5

233,080

37,428

it. 8

209,552

32,650

1 5 5

228,018

44.«»8

1 9 5

Dec

18.533

1936

6

7

1938

1927

Jan

219,673

34.601

15-7

344,016

39.344

16.3

360.981

37.135

Feb

227,047

32.695

1 4 8

257.375

39.772

15.6

367,043

35.183

13.3

Mar

236,911

34.712

M

256,384

36,103

14.1

280,907

36,733

13.»

Apr

240,346

»9,»20

12.3

358.333

31,82»

12.3

281,343

33,318

11

May

231,921

22,413

9-9

255.700

»5,460

9 9

283,013

»».978

8.»

7

14.3

7

June

338,119

22,715

9-6

263,584

»4.999

9

275.950

»I,»57

7

6

July

238,387

20,206

8.6

»57.919

21.254

8.3

280,727

»0.338

7

4

4

Aug

»38.245

1 9 . 5 "

8.3

260,498

»0,163

7-9

279,553

19,826

6.9

Sept

343,479

22,114

9 1

»68,374

»».347

8.4

292,867

»»,159

7 8

Oct

»47.893

28,390

11.4

»64,334

»7.38s

10.4

297.798

27,008

9.0

Nov

258,029

33.193

1 3 0

268,882

33.563

13

398,346

32,229

10.9

Dec

»49.968

47.614

19.1

272,560

50.655

18.6

388.615

49,633

1 7 3

8

164

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT UNEMPLOYMENT IN SWEDISH TRADE UNIONS (concluded)

1930

1929

Total Membership

Jan Feb Mai Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

292,120 302.S31 3«.065 300,879 301,314 296,041 307.180 317.014 310,42s 321.014 323.38s 325.838

Unemployed No.

%

43.424 44.254 44.250 35,989 24.4S2 21.764 20,048 19.9*4 22.271 27.529 33.s8l S3.977

14 8 14.6 13 7 II.4 7 7 6 8 6.3 6.1 6.7 82 10.1 16 3

Total Membership

328,109 337.932 345.707 346,284 349.436 355.894 349.345 352,114 359.6o6 364.059 365.884 359.118

1932 Jan Feb Mar Apr May. June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

381,106 93.272 393,934 93.900 405.564 98,772 393,526 82,500 400,169 7S.6SO 407.757 79.338 399,456 77.468 405,663 80,975 4I9.039 86.709 418,991 92,868 409,949 97,666 412,510 129,002

1931

Unemployed No.

%

45.636 4S.460 42,278 38,347 28,112 28,956 27,170 28,539 34.963 45.501 56.573 82,655

13 9 13 2 12 3 10.8 8.0 80 8.0 8.1 9 S 12 3 15 3 22.9

Total Membership

417.S9S 431.053 427.532 421,66$ 420,438 423.68s 418.984 389.751 393.567 394.877 397.324 397.736

120,156 118,2SI 121,456 110.05s 93.360 89.48s 83.771 76,686 77.013 79.678 88,100 109.778

No.

353.54» 70.437 364.387 66.923 378.520 72.944 369.631 64.534 377.072 49.807 379.955 45.839 372,928 46,180 383.571 48.590 395.796 54.405 404.654 68,490 399.984 79.484 404.983 110,149

1933 24. 2 23.8 24 1 20 8 19.0 19 3 19.4 20.0 20.6 22.1 24.I 3I.0

Unemployed

% 20.2 18.7 19.4 17 i >3 1 12.4 11.8 12.8 13 4 16.4 19 3 26.5

1934 28 8 27 7 28 7 24 3 21.1 20.3 19.4 19.6 19.2 20.2 22 3 27.I

377.997

91.762

24 I

1 Meddehnden fran K. KommerskoUegii, Afdtining for Arbetsstatistik of Sweden, Vol. iqi i , pp. 461, 835. Also monthly numbers of the Sociala Mcddelandtn, Vols. 1-44, 1911-1934, Cf. section of each issue entitled " Arbetsltis Helen tnom arbetarorganuaiumema." * The monthly numbers of the bociala Meddelanden, Vols. 19-44» 1921-1934. Cf. section of each issue entitled " Arbetsmorknad och arbeisU'shei t uiiandti," (¿¡verige, ArbeisUishet, i %).

APPENDIX C

165

TABLE XVI EMPLOYMENT IN DANISH TRADE UNIONS,

1930

Average Member* ship

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct. Nov Dec

Z93I

Average

Unemployed

Average

No.

%

Membership

No.

%

Membership

36,131 »4.315 17,965 10,535 7,73o 6.059 7,337 8,710 10,0x6 13.344 33.867 43.331

13-9 8.6 6.3 3 7 3.7 3.1 3-5 30 3-4 4 5 8.5 IS-5

64,730 73,407 69.387 58,006 40.778 46.533 46,373 48,040 47.134 40.358 58.083 74.581

31.4 34.0 33.3 19.6 17.0 16.1 16.1 16.9 16.7 17 6 30.8 36.8

389,315

57.166 60,736 40,684 38.135 33,898 30,733 19,315 30.343 19,603 30,381 30,990 50,148

31.8 33.1 15.6 11.0 8.9 8.1 75 8.0 77 8.0 13.1 19.6

56,119 56.795 43.188 31,056 15,119 13,116 14,086 14.844 15,131 18,341 34.575 45.30Ô 361,783

Unemployed

No.

%

83.464 91,190 86.637 57.336 38.535 33.363 31,193 39,314 37,381 30.703 30.146 53.597

3«.I 34* 33 0 33.3 ISO I3.9 13.1 II.4 XO-7 13.1 154 20 6

358.685

1934

1933

357,137

1033

Unemployed

185,706

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

1920-1933*

1935

31.6 31.9 16.7 8.1 5-8 50 5 4 5 6 5-8 70 9 3 17.1

44.643 44.468 40.055 35.646 31.807 34.135 33,393 36.348 38.509 36,536 55.797 85,944 369,338

16 6 16.S 14 7 13 4 13.0 9-1 8-3 98 X0.6 13.5 30.s 317

166

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT E M P L O Y M E N T I N D A N I S H T R A D E UNIONS ( c o n t i n u e d )

1936

1928

1927

Average

Unemployed

Average

Unemployed

Average

Unemployed

Membership

No.

%

Membership

No.

%

Membership

No.

%

81,869 74.700 58,014 44.983 40,302 42,993 46,191 46,117 44.677 50,388 61,467 88,854

29.8 27 3 21.2 16.5 14 7 15 6 16 8 16 8 163 18.3 22.4 32.2

87.315 85.617 71.811 62,928 52.419 49.405 47.172 44.827 43.990 48,007 59.847 87,116

31 8 31 2 26.2 23 0 19 i 18 0 17.2 16-4 16.0 17 5 21.8 31.6

8I,457 71.178 58.434 4S.414 38.492 36,917 36,91s 35,474 33.099 39.436 48.337 77.558

29.9 26.2 21.6 16 8 14.2 13 5 13 6 13 I 12.2 145 17 7 28.4

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

274.460

374,541

1929 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

76.059 81,355 59.7O8 36.592 29,671 27,398 26,621 25,164 24,175 28.194 36,302 62,563 276,058

271,960

1930 27 7 29 7 21.8 13 3 10.8 10.0 9.6 9 l 8.7 10.1 13.0 22.4

56,837 58,879 43.773 33,392 27,087 25,191 26,752 25.946 26,081 32,963 45,307 73,363 288,939

1931 19.9 20. s 15 3 11.6 9 4 8-7 93 9.0 9.0 11.4 15 5 25.1

69.698 70,82s 63,786 44.926 36,203 33.379 35.019 35.214 36.119 47.345 66,478 97,233 295.384

24.2 24 S 22.1 is 3 12 3 II 3 II 8 11.8 12. i 15 8 22.1 32 2

APPENDIX C EMPLOYMENT IN DANISH TRADE UNIONS ( c o n c l u d e d )

Average Annual Membership

Unemployed

No.

%

103,308 108,943

34« 35 9 35 8 »7-7 348 »4-9 »8.7 39.3 39.6 31 8 35-1 43 8

log, 003

»7,343 7i.6s8 78.614 90.593 93.451 93.910 101.518 113,506 I3Î.33S

Average Annual Membership

Unemployed

No.

313.867 1 S t a t a t i l i Aarbof of Denmark, VoL 36,1931, p. 135; Ibid., VoL 37, 1933, p. X37; Ibid., Vol. 38,1933. p. 131; Ibid., VoL 39,1934, p. 136; Ibid., Vol. 31,1936, p. 130; Ibid., Vol. 33,1937, p. 131; Ibid., Vol. 33, 1938, p. 119; Ibid., Vol. 34, X939, p . 133; Ibid., Vol. 35,1930, p. 133; Ibid., Vol. 36,1931, p. 134; Ibid., VoL 37,1933, p. 137; Ibid., Vol. 38, >933» P. " 5 -

168

SCANDINAVIAN

UNEMPLOYMENT

TABLE XVII TOTAL UNEMPLOYMENT IN G R E A T BRITAIN,

Jan.

1920 IQ3I 1922 1923 1924 192s 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 193» 1933 1934

6 I 8 2 18.6 13 2 ZI 9 ZI S 11 I 12 I IO 7 12 3 12 6 21 5 22 4 23 I 18.7

Feb.

4 42 9 5 17 9 12-3 10.7 zi.6 10.s 10.9 io. 4 12. 2 13 I 2I.7 22.0 22 8 18.2

Mar.

Apr.

May

2 80 2.68 63 3 «S 0 17 31 z6 O 1 4 . 6 4 6 zz. 2 ZI 4 9 9 9 5 9 7 II 4 ZI 2 IZ.2 9 8 9 2 145 8.8 9 9 9 4 9 6 9 9 9 6 IO z 9 9 9 9 14 0 14 6 IS 3 20 8 31 S 20 9 20 8 21 4 22.1 22 21 4 20.S

3 zi 16 11

June

July

Aug.

2 62 17 8l 13 7 II 3 9 4 12 2

2 73 14 80 13 0 11 5 9 9 II 5 Z4 6

13 12 II IO 12

14 7 8 9 IO 8 9 8 IS 8 21 8 22 3 19 S

9 3 zz 7 9 9 Z7 1 22 6 22 9 19 6

2 88 2 6 8 6

14 9 11 IO

S 2 4 7 I

17 S 22 7 23 I 19 2

I920-I9331

Sept.

Oct.

80 (•) 2 14 9 12 5 5 II 7 7 8 11 i II 4 4 13 9 13 6 9 4 9 5 11 8 11 5 IO I IO 4 18 I 18 7 21 9 33 2 22 9 21 9 l8 5 18 1

3 12 12 II IO 12

Nov.

Dec.

3 IS 12 II 11 II

18 9 12 7 10 7 10.9

7 7 9 5 0 0

13 10 12 II

5 0 2 0 19 I 21 4 22 2 17 9

S 8

IO 5 It.9 98 II . 2 II . I 20. 2 20.9 21 7 176

' From the monthly numbers of the British Ministry of Labour Gaulle, Vols. X X V 1 I I - X L I (1920-1933) inclusive, and Vol. XI.11, N'os. i , 2, and 3, 1934. under "Unemployment Insurance Statistics." These figures include the unemployment percentage of Northern Ireland. * Due to the general strike in the mining industry, no report was made.

APPENDIX C

169

TABLE XVIII INDEX o r EMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES, I 9 I 4 - I 9 3 4 1

Year

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

April

M a y

91.9

92.9

93

9 3 9

9 4 9

104.6

107.4

109.6

Z09.0

Z09.5

zzo.o

n o . 3

1ZO.O

117.0

117.s

" 7 4

115.0

ZZ5.Z

Z14.8

114.3

113-1

1918

« S S

114.7

116.5

1Z5.0

ZZ4.0

Z Z 3 4

114.6

1 1 4 5

1919

IIO.X

103.3

ZO4.0

Z03.6

Z06.3

1 0 8 7

zzo.7

1930

116.1

Z15.6

116.9

1x7. z

XZ7-4

1 1 7 9

zzo.o

1921

76.8

83.3

83.9

83.0

84.S

8 4 9

84

5

1933

87.0

8 7 7

83

2

82.4

8 4 3

8 7 1

1914 1915

1916 1911

9

June

July

Aug.

98

95

9

93.9

94

9

94

9

9 5 9

98

9

9

9 5 9

« 4

zzs.z

ZZ3.3

115.6

117.2

ZZ4.3

zzz. 5

Z13.4

113

IO9.9

ZZ3.Z

106.8

IIO.O

Z13 .3

ZO9.7

Z07.0

Z03.5

97-3

91.1

8 5 6

87.0

88.4

89

86.8

88.O

90.6

93.6

9 4 5

zo7.a

Z08.5

Z08.6

108. z

Z 0 9 4

93.3

9a.5

94.3

95-6

95.5

98.9

zoo. 4

toi. 8

101.8

101.8

n o . 8

zzo. 8

110.8

1924

103.8

105. i

104.9

Z02.8

98.8

95

1925 1926

9 7 9

100.4

zoo. a

98

9

98.0

97.3

97

102.

zoz.

99

S

1938 1939

IOI.J

8

zoo.3

99-3

97

7

98.7

99.0

9 0 S

98.6

97.6

97.0

9S-0

9 5 «

95

91.6

93

0

93-7

93-3

93.0

9J-I

93.3

93-6

95.0

95-a

97

4

98.6

99-1

99.a

98.8

98.3

98.6

9 9 3

97

3

92.9

zza.9

99.6

zoo.4

9

1ZZ.4

108.4

1937

93

zzo.7

98.0

7

9

Dec.

105.9

106.6

99

94

Nov.

103.8

1923«

6

Oct.

Z08.8

1933*

110.9

Sept.

8

100.7

5

4

100.7

5

89

9

96

6

105.4 97

S

100.8

99

5

98.9

93

5

93.6

9 5 9

95

4

95

98.4

95.0

95

3

5

9 2 3

1930

90.7

90.9

90.5

89.9

88.6

86.J

83.7

8 1 0

80.9

7 9 9

77-9

76.6

»931

74

75

75

9

75.7

75.3

73-4

71.7

71. a

70.9

68.9

6 7 1

66.7

1033

64.8

65.6

64

S

6a. a

59-7

57

55

56.0

58.5

5 9 9

59-4

58

«033

56.6

57-5

55-1

56.0

58.7

6a.8

71.6

73

74-0

7 1 4

70.1

'934*

69

73-5

80.8

6

3

3

5

6 7 3

»

9

3

> These data are gathered from the numbers of the Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor. See liontliy Labor Review, Vol. 33, No. 4, Oct. 1926, p. 166 for 1914—May 1923; Ibid., Vol. 34, No. 3, Feb. 193a, p. 4a7 for Jan. 1023—Dec. Z935; Ibid., Vol. 38, No. a, Feb. 1934, p. 390 for Jan. 1916—Dec. 1933; and Ibid., Vol. 38, No. 3, Mar. 1934, p. 690. * For the period 1914-May 1933 the index for each month is based on 1933 — 100; for Jan. 1933 on, 1936 — 1 0 0 ; beginning with March 1 9 3 4 a new base is used, three-year average 1 9 1 3 - 1 9 3 5 — 1 0 0

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT Applicants per loo Available Places

I70

•o-S >1 2 •3 S | S s ~ -a

I I * ¿a 8= «§ S 11 J—4

«

o 2 «

o>

0>

M

M

^

9

E»

«

M O O

«

Q> ^

^

O

>0

»O

M

«

M M M M M M M M M M M

O

M H

CO

T©

M

N ^

VO H

« o H * "M > T H O MO >N 0 N « »M ' OH M

M O » O > O

*

» «

W Ï ^ O » ^ a N IFL ft 1«

«O M

M

^

M

M

0 M

0 « 0 0 M M M

»

0

>

«*> O

0 M

»

M

0

«O « M

M « M oo o 9 > ^ ^ 0 Q 0O M N ofi o O H 00 « «1 Où oô * » lfl«6 « »o O « » ^ o o v> vO r-» o> oo O « CO «o

M

FF)

M

F»

M

K ) C T

0> O

^

O

.«»>*• 00 M 00 fO O>0 ei M M M M MMMrOM 00 W O W M M H go

i -s a "aS- o8 >¡2

00 O «*Î op n r» O «*? n« « M M M O O O1 O O O > V T O « 0 00 M « to O a £

O

0>

^ »O (»1 M 0> to 0> O ^ N < ^ N M

9 n 9 ^ N n w oo « o> o >o m oo oo « V N 00 « -a

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

00

o>

JS

O « 00 M vp « t a o « v i 9 M oo A f») * M W io V ' O W> oo a o> U

3

«

£

0> M M O M «O O W « Oi O O V> 0 ^ « » ) 00 «1 9 «0 » »100 9 M N H n n n N H N n c i N N H


11 8

V) N M O ^ n M o> QO CO H H

n

«

0 0 n W) W O

«1 « 9 9

W«0 O 9

«n «

f«

s a fa «

V) V| (J 9 1«) n « O N « «o N M * ^ ^ ». « V) V) V> « M H VI « H N « 9 N

àìt f i * » a 8= «s

j - £

>S a «o

« to 0> O ce VIM o nv) e > 0 »* 00 o » n « o M N « H 0 f ) M 00 N "t H & >© r* «) © » T S N • F» « T M M M N M M W M H N h M M(I oo o ^

N O >

4)

¡1 I s àJ-fi 1 3*

IN

0

»

t*.

>© O ^ 0 0 N

M

0

«M W & ) 0>

m is oo in go oo oo oo >o «i m T O ó M r ^ o *-0> M w vi « n « 9 9 0 vi io V> * N « M >0 V) N N H H H N « H H H ( 1 N H M

TE M VI

OO

OO

«

U">

«

M (1 O

M

0 ^ O" i - t«» •© 0> »— M O oo C O -o 0 M «w M go N ^ O 00 M M «O M IA O 4

Oo « ^« ^ o> oo « (»00 M o> oo ^ moo oo « « ^o 1^ ro O» « *«. 00 wi» N 9>

j,

3 0

II«

î S 3 ® ' S 2 J-8 to N 00 0 S N q H O O C0 4 O • N 0" w O « «0 M

«

«

« 0

M 0 N (O M M 0 0 « O «•> 00 * 0 ^e «0 0 >0 to 00 t- S

to

3. M

u 3

8

| P .

M

M

N

O

N

«

2

- «

«

N

«

H

H

M

N

M

«

N

N

M

M

N

V > V>

O

T O O to 0 n ^ s vt 1« «*> M M N N ^ N N •*> M N & M OK « N « < O V> 0> OO M W] «0 H W M 0 O VI O S 0 to H H « « n < i N n t i n M M Q R»

TO

"1 a 5 J -

M

TO R »

M

O

o Nn co n 00 N F 9

D

n

M

0 TO >Ô M V) N K

• n to n

TO O

0

^ ô o> O co •*» » « M

M

00 q

1 8 * 1 * 1 8

10 CO co w) N M V) A M r> 0 « N n « ( ^ M n o o < o v> v> Q w M

8 .2 M 1 1 1

§ =5jb

§

s ' 0 "O 2 « a > 0 «5 o>

£

a ifi f) 0> M

¡ 1

8 =

w

VO M N « O M N CI N

n V) ^ « O O n H ««3

VI H «OOO O « N in PI Ct

N « N V) M 00 f> t* O •© « « O0 VI 00 ^ n 9>0> M

cQ >0 n

M 0 m 00 « in o> N ^ «00 ^ ^ W M C O M ^ ^ O X N I ' O « "f N t O f ^ M 0* O »O

M

1 S i P. O > < '3 a s

•H M M Q O > t » 0

0 r- p> m m v>oo fo «0 « N M « 0 O O 00 M O t-. wo 00 « «© O« «* M o> 00 0 v> «« v© C*

0

o S » o 8 C» «

T

MM

®

a

N

«

N IO O

'S ^ £ N

N

V)

T-. -O 00

00

O" 0

«

%

I

«O

Ó> OO M H

«

I «

I

1

- I

i s & i «

«

«

3

6?

V)V) WÌ O O O «O M U ) « * ) •OO r*î O O **toQ tooo »O to tnO N00 QO NO w> O" « - t m ^ H « * • N 0 o »«oo « 0 fOOO M M & M POCOoMM (> fôoo M 0 W>«0 - O t t « M M W M M

SCANDINAVIAN UNEMPLOYMENT Kronor State

to O N «o « n v i ^ o to o n « Vh-N O «

O O

N

O to «o >o «i « o

«OO N N T * «

to T O t O » O T « 0 « 0 T « 0 T T

N o o^o T © «o * T «ooo N

H

M «

h« IOO O O N »o « oo Oi «Ovo « »O T to

«O

to

Number Total By Commune By StateCommune

to » o 00

T O « 0 T T T * * T T « 0 « 0 « 0 « 0

N O to NO O

O O O T T Q T O O O» M «O M M O IO 0 0 «o N O to o « Oi « H. T O «o «O Oi «O to to 0 « » N N 9 OiH io «O T

T «O «

N (T M M M M N

to O O ®

IO to M »-< « O

M

Ol O « to 00 OO l O OMMMOlOl?*MtO

N

«O © «O «O T «O T O 00 O «O T «O M o « » H S H Ifl O M « l'I N M M to w 00

• M F L ^ V L T N O T O "O N M W N N Ó O N » Q NTO « T N « M O «O M « O T N

N N H

« « M H N H M H M N N L O

M

M M

M O O N N O T O «O « o «o T (O M M OO l O O "O o> — N m totoo M 00 OiO t o M O N O i O ^ p i O H C IO N H H I^NOO OMOONT«OMMÖ TO n n M MMMMMM«« O> R ) CI T « o T o>co

T » N O O 0 O 0 to Ol tOOO M 00 N o

0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

O N T

M W

«

«O

«

NO «OOO M T NO «O M « O « QOitoTOtoOitoO m T T T M M « « NCO T T « NtO««GOtOAM « o M t ««0 ô « 0 0 oo

W

«>40 N Ö l N 9 < 4 n O «O f> O

FJBJH)« « H H

^ ^

O

T«)T« N H M

VM0

By

Com-

ToUl

« « 0

M*

mune

Cash

«o

V> TFLO

MM

MIOHOHOOIFL

M

NOv>v)0 «

C O

9 M NlOKOiO>n l o o b. fi *•> T «•> ti

M

M

M

V) n too n O O O O O h O N ION«)« FT

Unem-

ployed

tered

Regis-

N «)•>)*)

M

« M F " J O l Ç O O M C H Vî 5

FÒ^O M

o o

M

^ ô t M

CL N N H M

M

V ) V I O N N « M > N N »OÖ M00 NO_"T N « 0 «

»-00

M «O 0 00 00 M

VMO

M H H

H H N M

N N TO N O O O O

t o

Num-

«OTT

M M M

S?

Total

T V «

•»O « v i H n N O O H N «òoo

«00

n M n N n n

M mi^OtNM N « N « t o e c ot^O«»© «o O t O 0 4 «0

mune

By

0 * O

T «ô «ó «í «í TOO

OOOOO « ^ «o •>)

V>

6?

Number of Unemployed Given Public Relief

*

OO

^ WWW} ^ ^ ( ^ « ( ^ n «o«)

ber

Num-

and Work

Total Cash

w» È?

W-JCO O

¿ © O

M

S

« o oo

M

M M

n «

M M

niA« N

t

m » r * o 1 1 «»> too M M

«ó

M

N V ) 0 M O * » V>00 « M

M A O O neo H n toQOOO 0 «oft n t o «o n «i m n r-»o «

« « M

M

^ « K I N O N O N 0 N«« n

VMQ n M

VWOOQ w»

N 0 — O O O O* N00 O>

O

N O o> * M o>ao o » « N N O »o «o « «o o n o MMMMMMMMMMMtt

S?

*0 T N w>oo M » Á N NOO n

3 (S

MO Ol NVIIAÀAlO NO * * t MV)H* • o * o o H Q>O «OOO M o o o o « o IOVIH N O FI ô>00 S I N V ) N ) « H N NOO < 0 0 *

«o

"S

ja

O J» «

Naoioo «o M M * V) « 0>0 00 vi v> v> «O00 «O O M fOOO V) Q> M O O NM 0 • « t» MX 0 * n O M O»00 N «1 0 « MM

l o O i N t * 0 0 OO 0 » 0 «OOO M OO 00

A

0 « * 0> « 0»0 to to ô "O o M « 0> •O'O «O v> w>o M O to n M M M N « «1 * o o «oo t o o o o o * M 00 P> N O «o nnn« M Ho« «O

Total Number Registered Unemployed

C/3

oo 0> N T M *ao V> N o « V> IO M W) 0> T « N * VI * *oO O O>00 •*) «o f> * VM0 o ^

N M N H N M T%

« «oo n o » N H «o » «*> TOO M

IO M TOO 0 N 0 M N AO O> V> V> M o N V>o NÔ0

*

Ú Ú

i ú

0

S3

|||

5 5 ¿2

183

A M T0 W » V ) O N O AH. M M T»} «O 0 CO T » 0 0 to N O

« 0 0 T O

wo

Kronor

Total Sute Expenditure

APPENDIX C m

m

»000 A O N O 0 0 N N

V|

N N MO N N T F NK) «O

TO

ft FS9

O

6?

Í»

Hi i £

M S

t b

*£

1

& •0 =3 pi

3 £

«O O

W

O M M O N H O N ^ N F L N »00 »0 10 «O 10 »0 0> 0> 0> O 0 Ó H M H M H M M H

W N

H K)

NV>

0

A T « N V ) H T - Q E C < O O 4 5 « >0 »0 »0 0 > « 1 0 O O > 9 S N O O H « O O TO N O 0 « N

V>aooe

ttttttttttt»o

»0 «0 N O Q *) «OO « O M«000 « NO 0>M t t M N « «0 »00 N M too t N 0 0 gMOi»Ó«00>0> a>00 M t

00>v)MMHinOHeonM MQ^OONOO O-1 M QiM NN« M ttoo MO0O O «0 « 00 «0 t Ñ c> Ñ 0" Ñ 0" N t»o»o»ot«ototott»oio »OOVM O N « »O N n t i o t o NO t t « «o V)"ÍM »O M 00O tooI OM to>NtN0 00 N0 M OOO V M O t M t O 00 00 N i o t t o t too N NM MMMMMMMMMMMM M M M ^ ^M M ^TS 00

0 M »O « O 0 OlH n UlOlV) «roo1 00 »0N m00t oH r-o N t t ot 00 « nt O M óo «0 to v>0 NntO vi

1

Total Number Registered Unemployed

t/J

1933 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

z.8

« 0 0 «

V ) 0> N < 0 N M (T H N f l O < T « FLNNNNTO^^TONNN

O

fia V3

TO 1 1 0 > 0 t

W> V M O M)3-3 7SÌ

5-SO

710

0.36

0.38 0.07

3-9

o-SS

4-6 1-3 1.3 7.I

O.IO 0-45

X-4 6-3

5-36

5-9

0.36

4-9 M 1-3 75

7.1

0.65 0.38

8.8

O.67

8.8

3-3

0-39

S-I

0.64 0.35

9-1 3-6

0.5 0.3

M ]

3.6 0.1

O.IO

O.IO

O.O9

1.0

0.7S

«•4

0.04 0.03 1.09

»4-9

0-4 0.03 - 0.3 I.II 14-5

0.03 0.01 0.93

O.I 13-3

93-9

6.16

94.O

6J0

93.3

7.16

93.6

6.74

9S-3

6.08 100.0

6.55

IOO«

738

IOO.O

7-74

100.0

7-07

IOO.O

0.68

II.3

0.48

7-3

0.67

9-0

1.07

13.8